Disagreements regarding Chosen Ones of God

[nPeace]

If we go by the statements of Jesus, we cannot insist Jesus meant God is literally His Father:

Jesus said:
"Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father."
John 16:25

What I find worthy to note here is that, although Gospels are written more than a thousands years after Jewish Scriptures, it still fundamentally saying same concept: that, it is not like Prophet always speak literally, but They also speak Figuratively, and in this instance Jesus is making it clear that He was speaking about the Father Figuratively. In another words, He did not mean His words to be taken literally. The idea of Trinity is due to literal understanding of the word of Jesus regarding the Father.

What do you say to my suggesting that you are interpreting these scriptures to support a belief that is not in harmony with the scriptures?

Consider, if we read the scripture as it is, without picking out one verse and putting our interpretation to it, but reading the text as it is, therefore allowing the text to be its own interpreter.
John 16
25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.

26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: 27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.

28 I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

29 His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.

30 Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God.

31 Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe?

32 Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

Now we see the true interpretation.
Jesus was in no way saying that everything he said to them was in parables, but on this occasion, what he said to them was not plain for them to grasp, particularly this illustration in the previous verses....

20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.

21 A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.

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

...which he told them to help explain what they clearly were trying to understand.

17 Then said some of his disciples among themselves, What is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me: and, Because I go to the Father?

18 They said therefore, What is this that he saith, A little while? we cannot tell what he saith.

19 Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him, and said unto them, Do ye inquire among yourselves of that I said, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me?

Most of the time Jesus spoke plainly to his disciples, and when he used illustration, they were illustration that were simple, and easy to grasp - example, the sermon on the mount.
Other illustration were a bit more deep, but anyone who wanted to understand, just had to ask Jesus for the explanation, and they got it, but those who were not humble enough were left clueless. Matthew 13

This is the same way God operated. He was always clear.
Even the prophecies were explained - all of them.
The ones for the distant future were not for those alive, and so certain details were not given. What purpose would that serve?

Matthew 13:10-17
10 So the disciples came and said to him: “Why do you speak to them by the use of illustrations?” 11 In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’ 16 “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them.

Matthew 11:25, 26
25 At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to young children. 26 Yes, O Father, because this is the way you approved.

Colossians 1:26, 27
26 the sacred secret that was hidden from the past systems of things and from the past generations. But now it has been revealed to his holy ones, 27 to whom God has been pleased to make known among the nations the glorious riches of this sacred secret, which is Christ in union with you, the hope of his glory.
1 Corinthians 2:9, 10

So, according to scripture and not interpretation, which seems designed to fit a religious belief, can we insist that Jesus meant God is literally His Father?
Matthew 16:13-17
13 When he had come into the region of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus asked his disciples: “Who are men saying the Son of man is?” 14 They said: “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them: “You, though, who do you say I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father in the heavens did.

Most definitely - Jesus insisted that he is the son of God, and his followers believed this - through the Holy Spirit.

 

[oldbadger]

Those books support the view that nature can teach us all about God.

It is a special person that knows how all is connected to nature without reading the books.

Regards Tony

The books are interesting, and have told many stories, some true, some not so true, but if God had wanted to communicate with mankind, a God that is as vast and powerful as all of created matter and energy, I rather think that s/he would have been much more competent about it all than those books have been.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hi Trailblazer, would I be right to say that you just took two texts from the Bible, which you say no one understand but Bahai?

It would be right to say that regarding the prophecies for the time of the end and the return of Christ, only Baha’is understand what they mean.

That does not mean that only Baha’is know what the Bible means in general. I am sure there are varying degrees of understanding of the Bible among both Christians and Baha’is. However, if the Baha’i Faith is the truth then many Christian interpretations cannot be accurate; e.g., that Jesus was God incarnate, that Jesus literally rose from the dead and ascended to heaven in a body and that Jesus will return on a cloud in the same body. There is no way that both Christians and Baha’is can be correct in their Bible interpretations that pertain to these beliefs since they are contradictory.

Consider:
In one breath, you say - not in these exact words... but - basically, all the followers o the religions of God, do not understand the Bible, which must be interpreted accurately.
In the other breath, you say, Bahai has the right interpretation, so they understand it. Therefore Bahai is right.

Why is your interpretation of those two text right when you apply them to your beliefs?
Why is it reasonable to assume that the Baha’i Faith is the religion that knows what the Bible really means because the "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came.

If Baha’u’llah was indeed the return of Christ who fulfilled the Daniel 12 prophecy then it is reasonable to assume that he unsealed the Book making it understandable. This is what Baha’is believe happened.

Daniel Chapter 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. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.​

That does not mean that Christians did not understand anything in the book, rather it means that knowledge will be increased so you will know MORE. The Church interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it. The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. The 2,300 years was up in 1844 and the book was unsealed.

There is a starting point from which the waiting in Dan 12:12 began, so if one knows how to do the math, the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days comes out to the exact year the Bab came to announce the coming of Baha’u’llah. This and the math is explained by Abdu’l-Baha in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

Bible verses can have more than one meaning and many of those meanings can be correct, even though they differ. However, but since Baha’u’llah was the Representative of God among men He had the authority to interpret the Word of God in the Bible. Moreover, Baha’u’llah appointed His eldest son Abdu’l-Baha as the Centre of His Covenant so His son had the authority vested in Him to interpret the Bible.

“Know assuredly that just as thou firmly believest that the Word of God, exalted be His glory, endureth for ever, thou must, likewise, believe with undoubting faith that its meaning can never be exhausted. They who are its appointed interpreters, they whose hearts are the repositories of its secrets, are, however, the only ones who can comprehend its manifold wisdom. Whoso, while reading the Sacred Scriptures, is tempted to choose therefrom whatever may suit him with which to challenge the authority of the Representative of God among men, is, indeed, as one dead, though to outward seeming he may walk and converse with his neighbors, and share with them their food and their drink.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 175-176​

If some other religion claims that they are right, and you are wrong, why are you right?

The Baha’i Faith is right if Baha’u’llah was the most current Manifestation of God who spoke with the Voice of God, since God is always right.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The books are interesting, and have told many stories, some true, some not so true, but if God had wanted to communicate with mankind, a God that is as vast and powerful as all of created matter and energy, I rather think that s/he would have been much more competent about it all than those books have been.

Or we could consider that maybe we should be more spiritually inclined.

I see it like asking a child to do nuclear pyhsics, maybe we are still not quite ready to understand the spiritual connection.

Regards Tony

 

[nPeace]

That's quite a polemic against the Baha'i Faith.

Really? Please explain how so.

The fundamental problem with this post is you have muddled two independent religions, the Baha'i Faith and Ahmadiyyas. The Baha'is are not the Ahmadiyyas and the Ahmadiyyas are not Baha'is. You are really struggling to get your head around all this lol.

Where did I say they are one and the same?
No, I'm not struggling... the least bit. Why would you think that?
Perhaps you assumed the worst from the post.

It may interest you to know that Islam has some similar theological beliefs to the JWs. For example Islam teaches Trinity and Jesus is not literally God incarnate.

I didn't know JW teaches the Trinity! Gasp! I'm shocked!
No they don't. Where did you get that idea?
Does Islam teach Trinity?

Sounds like you have a lot to learn about different religions. I suppose if you think we are all from Satan and then all this crazy book of revelation nonsense is about to happen, there's not too much motivation. Lets just blindly post as many biblical scriptures as possible instead.

Seems like you didn't understand the purpose of this post.
So maybe that's why you didn't clarify, or address the question?

No, it was not an attack. No, i did not mix up the religions.
However, I did make a few statement, which you haven't denied, but instead turned to the JWs belief, seemingly almost as if to say, "Well, you do too."

So I hope that clears a few misunderstandings.
1. The Bahai Faith is in harmony with Muslim faith which contradicts the Bible, and the Christian Faith.

It's a statement - not an attack. If you deny it, I can show you where in the post, I sought to confirm that.

2. What say the Bahai... Does Bahai agree with the Quran in these things, or is this a corrupt interpretation?

So I was asking if that sect of Muslim had misinterpreted the Quran, or if the Bahais agreed.

Well, admittedly,the last statement was a bit strong, so I could understand why you felt it was an attack on your faith, and decided to throw a low blow. So hopefully we are even.

You missed though. Did I ?

 

[Tumah]

I agree with this.

.
Now, this part is what you say is what i cannot understand:

'That means that the other prophets - with the exception of Daniel on certain occasions - received their visions as "riddles" and interpreted them on the spot before passing on the message.'

No where in the scriptures, as far as I know, it says that everytime the prophets received their visions as riddles, they interpreted them on the spot. I will be happy if you can quote this from Bible for me.

It is obvious that it must be that way. Let's take 2 Kings 20:1-6 as an example. Hezekiah gets sick, Isaiah tells him that G-d said he's going to die, Hezekiah prays and G-d tells him to turn around and tell Hezekiah that he'll make it. Both statements made by Isaiah in the name of G-d are completely clear and understandable. There's no riddle to them. Yet by virtue of the verse you quoted earlier, we're forced to say that when Isaiah received these two prophecies about Hezekiah, he received them in an unclear manner and then Isaiah had to interpret them and pass them to Hezekiah. We don't see anything riddle-like about the prophecy Isaiah received about Hezekiah, what Isaiah said in G-d's Name was pretty straightforward. That means that Isaiah translated the prophecy on the spot and delivered the interpretation to Hezekiah - and to us - and that this interpretation was authoritative enough that Hezekiah would rely on it, and Jeremiah would write it in the Book of Kings.
If the prophets themselves were not capable of understanding their own visions, then no one would trust their messages.
We find the majority of prophecies are written as spoken statements, which, considering they were delivered as visions, means that the prophet had already interpreted them, before transcribing them.
We understand that even the visions that are not written as spoken statements must have already gone through the prophet's interpretation as we've already stated that they are capable of interpretation and do interpret them.
So difficulty in understanding a prophecy (except for Daniel, whose meaning was hidden), is from lack of knowledge on the part of the reader, not on the part of the prophecy.

@adrian009 may know from the Bible, what was the reason that God spoke to other prophets in riddles. There must have been a reason.

Of course there is a reason.

I think, the reason is, the words must remain closed until the time of End, as in the vision of Daniel can be seen. The interpretations of vision must kept closed and sealed.

Not all prophets prophesied about the End Times, so that doesn't seem like it should be a reason why all prophets besides Moses should have visions in riddles. Only Daniel's vision was sealed, because through his vision, we'd be able to calculate the arrival of the Messianic Age and that would impinge on our exiled state.

This same is also repeated from Isaiah.

That's not what Isaiah is talking about.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Seems like you didn't understand the purpose of this post.
So maybe that's why you didn't clarify, or address the question?

So why introduce the Ahmadiyyas? They have nothing to do with the Baha'i Faith and not considered part of Islam.

No, it was not an attack. No, i did not mix up the religions.

When Christian fundamentalists start using labels like false prophet and Satan what's a guy to think?

However, I did make a few statement, which you haven't denied, but instead turned to the JWs belief, seemingly almost as if to say, "Well, you do too."

The Baha'is are open about what they believe. If you want to have a discussion about our respective faiths ask courteous respectful questions. Don't throw in quotes that are irrelevant.

So I hope that clears a few misunderstandings.
1. The Bahai Faith is in harmony with Muslim faith which contradicts the Bible, and the Christian Faith.

It's a statement - not an attack. If you deny it, I can show you where in the post, I sought to confirm that.

There is no contradiction between the Bible, the Quran, or the Baha'i Faith. There is certainly contradictions between how Christians, Muslims and Baha'is see their respective sacred writings and the writings of the other two faiths. So while contradictions seem obvious to many they are largely the result of religious adherents misunderstanding the scripture of their faiths and those of others. The three religions consist of a Revelation from God in three very different cultures and at different points of history. That also accounts for some of the diversity of belief too.

2. What say the Bahai... Does Bahai agree with the Quran in these things, or is this a corrupt interpretation?

You will need to be more specific. You had mentioned the Mahdi prophecy. That concerns the Promised Qa'im or 12th Imam. The Baha'i faith emerged out of Persia in the 19th century during a period of intense Messianic expectation very much like amongst the Jews when Christ came. At that time the clergy was fanatical and conservative. Many thousands of the early Baha'is were put to death as the Persian authorities did not take kindly to the claims of the Bab who made claim to this prophecy. The reality is the Bab had simply come as John the Baptist had in Christianity, to prepare the way for One whose Ministry would be far greater. That One was Baha'u'llah (meaning the Glory of God). Check out the concordance of any Bible and see how frequently 'Glory of God' is mentioned. Some are Messianic references.

The Báb | What Bahá’ís Believe

Báb - Wikipedia

So I was asking if that sect of Muslim had misinterpreted the Quran, or if the Bahais agreed.

Well, admittedly,the last statement was a bit strong, so I could understand why you felt it was an attack on your faith, and decided to throw a low blow. So hopefully we are even.

You missed though. Did I ?

Lets keep it courteous and respectful.

We both know we believe very different things.

My bad with the Trinity btw. I had meant to write neither Muslims nor JWs believe in the Trinity.

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201308/trinity/

Nor do the Baha'is.

It may be one of the few things we have in common

 

[Tumah]

I agree.



Of course anyone can convert to Judaism.

Conversion to Judaism - Wikipedia

If you say of course, then why would you say that it wouldn't be fair for G-d to mainly be for Jews?

Any ideas about the numbers of adherents to Judaism that are not ethnically Jewish?

No clue/

Jesus never taught the doctrine of trinity. That was a creation of the Christian Church in the 4th century AD. Muhammad specifically discouraged such a belief.

You are shifting the goalposts. As you said:

If He's a G_d that is concerned for a wider audience these false prophets seem to be doing a reasonably good job of educating their followers about your G_d and His prophets.​

These false prophets have not done a reasonably good job of educating their followers about my G-d. We can go so far as to say that if this was their intent, than not only were they astoundingly unsuccessful, they actually made things even worse: how many Jews were forced or enticed to convert to Christianity over the years? Who was it that said something about knowing the person by the fruits of their labor?

It was an enormous achievement for Muhammad to teach the disparate pagan nomadic tribesman of the Arabian peninsula there was one God. He united these tribes and taught them about to be like the Jews and Christians and worship the One True G_d. The Quran mentions about 40 - 50 characters on the Tanakh so that went along way to educating His people. The Torah (Tawrat) is mentioned 18 times and the name Moses (Musa)136 times.

Torah in Islam - Wikipedia

I do agree that Muhammad was successful in spreading monotheism. However, if you call those statistics "educating their followers about G-d['s]... prophets", then I have to say that I hope you use much higher standards than these for other important areas of your life.

That is useful to hear you referring to this chapter. The strength of RF is to enable us all to learn about each others faiths if we want.

If that is what you came here for...

There were strong historic circumstances and leanings towards Judaism. Both Muhammad and Jesus respected the Torah and the Jewish prophets as is. Clearly both felt inspired by G_d to adapt those Teachings to the exigencies of a new era in human history. In that respect both appeared to have been successful. What G_d taught the peoples of India was entirely different reflecting the culture.

Let's be honest here. We don't know anything about what Jesus knew or said. All we have are books written by followers from a different generation who, perhaps owing to having written their books separately, couldn't agree on a narrative. You are going to quote to me about Jesus telling his followers to listen to the Pharisees and I am going to quote to you about Jesus nullifying the Sabbath Laws. The NT is a mess brought about by multiple authors with different agendas fabricating narratives to meet their criteria. We don't know anything about what Jesus thought of felt. All we have are the books written by the NT authors and the result of those book that is the Christian nation. And frankly, in terms of spreading Jewish concepts, they've failed miserably.
Similarly, attributing Divine inspiration to Muhammad is nothing more than a self-serving argument. He may have appreciated the bond that Jews had with each other and Christians had with each other and he wanted to spread that type of bond to the many tribes Arabia, using the same medium he saw worked for Jews and Christians. Maybe he wanted to forge the Arabian tribes in a single conquering force. We have no idea what his intent was and while he was successful in spreading monotheism, he was absolutely unsuccessful of spreading Jewish knowledge (had that actually been his intent).

That is true, but did any of those false prophets teachings to the extent Christianity and Islam has?

I don't see that as an argument. Out of 10,000 unsuccessful attempts, 2 were successful. That's just a statistic.

The theological question is the gist of what I'm getting at. I would never have come to appreciate the Torah and the Jewish prophets if it had not been for my Christian ancestors.

And how is your appreciation of the Torah important?

I don't talk to too many who strictly observe the Torah as some Jews do. Yet I talked for such a person for a couple of hours yesterday. We had both attended the same church many years ago. He has now converted to Judaism as I have become a Baha'i. G_d moves in mysterious ways.

Why are you blaming this on G-d? Blame yourself.

 

[Dawnofhope]

If you say of course, then why would you say that it wouldn't be fair for G-d to mainly be for Jews?

No clue/

I suspect that the majority of adherents of Judaism are ethnically Jewish. So if Judaism is the only true religion from G-d if you are ethnically Jewish you are much more likely to be exposed to Judaism than for many people in the world who have probably never had a conversation to a Jew about religion.

In 2012 there are only an estimated 14 million Jews worldwide or about 0.2% of the worlds popoulation. There are countries in Africa with hardly any Jews. That doesn't seem very fair of G-d to make it so easy for some people to find out about His Teachings and others almost impossible.

Perhaps Muhammad and Jesus were false prophets but they have certainly caused people to move away from paganism and to monotheistic worship, but thats not the only consideration. What counts for many of us is a person's attitude and conduct. I'd rather associate with people who endeavour to live a good life than faith adherent that failed to meet basic standards of human decency.

You are shifting the goalposts. As you said:
If He's a G_d that is concerned for a wider audience these false prophets seem to be doing a reasonably good job of educating their followers about your G_d and His prophets.

So Islam and Christianity have become corrupted. That's plain to see. Has your religion never been corrupted?

These false prophets have not done a reasonably good job of educating their followers about my G-d. We can go so far as to say that if this was their intent, than not only were they astoundingly unsuccessful, they actually made things even worse: how many Jews were forced or enticed to convert to Christianity over the years? Who was it that said something about knowing the person by the fruits of their labor?

I need to be brutally frank here. Humanity in many respects has often been no better than savages. Forced religious conversion has no place in G-ds plan, nor does racism, yet these practices have been very prevalent into relatively recently in human history. In fact we still have a long way to go. I suppose its been human nature for one tribe or race to feel superior to another. Your people have experienced the appalling brunt of humanities inhumanity not so long ago and of course suffered immeasurably.

I do agree that Muhammad was successful in spreading monotheism. However, if you call those statistics "educating their followers about G-d['s]... prophets", then I have to say that I hope you use much higher standards than these for other important areas of your life.

From the birth of Islam came the Islamic golden age which saw the Abbasid Caliphate oversee wat was probably the most advance civilisation of its day.

Islamic Golden Age - Wikipedia

The spread of Islam into Europe through Spain and Turkey was probably the single most important factor for igniting the European renaissance.

Islamic world contributions to Medieval Europe - Wikipedia

If that is what you came here for...

It is. I will defend my religion as you will. The best way to learn is being committed to learning about other faiths and that means talking to those who are learned in their faith.

Let's be honest here. We don't know anything about what Jesus knew or said. All we have are books written by followers from a different generation who, perhaps owing to having written their books separately, couldn't agree on a narrative. You are going to quote to me about Jesus telling his followers to listen to the Pharisees and I am going to quote to you about Jesus nullifying the Sabbath Laws. The NT is a mess brought about by multiple authors with different agendas fabricating narratives to meet their criteria. We don't know anything about what Jesus thought of felt. All we have are the books written by the NT authors and the result of those book that is the Christian nation. And frankly, in terms of spreading Jewish concepts, they've failed miserably.
Similarly, attributing Divine inspiration to Muhammad is nothing more than a self-serving argument. He may have appreciated the bond that Jews had with each other and Christians had with each other and he wanted to spread that type of bond to the many tribes Arabia, using the same medium he saw worked for Jews and Christians. Maybe he wanted to forge the Arabian tribes in a single conquering force. We have no idea what his intent was and while he was successful in spreading monotheism, he was absolutely unsuccessful of spreading Jewish knowledge (had that actually been his intent).

Wow! That's a lot to digest and unpackage, but thank you for your honesty. I may come back to you. I suddenly feel intense fatigue at the very thought of being simultaneously a Christian and Islamic apologist.

I don't see that as an argument. Out of 10,000 unsuccessful attempts, 2 were successful. That's just a statistic.

And how is your appreciation of the Torah important?

I'm a Baha'i so appreciation of the Torah is very important.

Why are you blaming this on G-d? Blame yourself.

I never blame G-d. How much I internalise and externalise....well

 

[InvestigateTruth]

It is obvious that it must be that way. Let's take 2 Kings 20:1-6 as an example. Hezekiah gets sick, Isaiah tells him that G-d said he's going to die, Hezekiah prays and G-d tells him to turn around and tell Hezekiah that he'll make it. Both statements made by Isaiah in the name of G-d are completely clear and understandable. There's no riddle to them. Yet by virtue of the verse you quoted earlier, we're forced to say that when Isaiah received these two prophecies about Hezekiah, he received them in an unclear manner and then Isaiah had to interpret them and pass them to Hezekiah. We don't see anything riddle-like about the prophecy Isaiah received about Hezekiah, what Isaiah said in G-d's Name was pretty straightforward. That means that Isaiah translated the prophecy on the spot and delivered the interpretation to Hezekiah - and to us - and that this interpretation was authoritative enough that Hezekiah would rely on it, and Jeremiah would write it in the Book of Kings.
If the prophets themselves were not capable of understanding their own visions, then no one would trust their messages.
We find the majority of prophecies are written as spoken statements, which, considering they were delivered as visions, means that the prophet had already interpreted them, before transcribing them.
We understand that even the visions that are not written as spoken statements must have already gone through the prophet's interpretation as we've already stated that they are capable of interpretation and do interpret them.
So difficulty in understanding a prophecy (except for Daniel, whose meaning was hidden), is from lack of knowledge on the part of the reader, not on the part of the prophecy.

.

Therefore do you agree that, in Jewish Scriptures, no where it is written that after God spoke in riddles to Prophets, They interpreted them on the spot. It is just a conclusion which you make, which could be right or not right. But it really depends on the confirmation of God. For example you quoted some verses as an example, showing that there is no riddle in them. What if in the sight of God, there are actually some hidden meanings in them, and God raises a prophet later showing what the riddles are in them, and also explaining why God spoke in riddles before and why He did not want to provide its interpretation on the spot, until a future time when its time comes to reveal it. How do you know this is impossible?
Also, i don't see anywhere in scriptures saying the Prophets did not know the interpretations of riddles. In an instance, we see that Danial is asked to keep it closed, which can be understood as, He may know its interpretations, but however He is not allowed to reveal it.
And we do see in some cases such as in Isaiah that, there will come a time that even blind will see the knowledge of those visions or books. This obviously tells us, that whatever is kept hidden in the Book, at some point must become known through the will of God.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

What do you say to my suggesting that you are interpreting these scriptures to support a belief that is not in harmony with the scriptures?

I say, you can make this suggestion, but I don't think what you suggest is correct. I already quoted many verses showing why the Bahai belief is confirming the Bible and the fulfilment of its prophecy. You did not make any direct reply to those posts which included even a proof

Consider, if we read the scripture as it is, without picking out one verse and putting our interpretation to it, but reading the text as it is, therefore allowing the text to be its own interpreter

It is a good consideration. Lets not do that.

John 16
25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.

26 At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: 27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.

28 I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

29 His disciples said unto him, Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and speakest no proverb.

30 Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God.

31 Jesus answered them, Do ye now believe?

32 Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

Now we see the true interpretation.
Jesus was in no way saying that everything he said to them was in parables, but on this occasion, what he said to them was not plain for them to grasp, particularly this illustration in the previous verses....

That is right. But Jesus is saying whatever He had said about the Father in His first coming are in the form of figurative. Consider the verse is making a comparison between first coming and the future return.

20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, That ye shall weep and lament, but the world shall rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow shall be turned into joy.

21 A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.

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

...which he told them to help explain what they clearly were trying to understand.

17 Then said some of his disciples among themselves, What is this that he saith unto us, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me: and, Because I go to the Father?

18 They said therefore, What is this that he saith, A little while? we cannot tell what he saith.

19 Now Jesus knew that they were desirous to ask him, and said unto them, Do ye inquire among yourselves of that I said, A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me?

Most of the time Jesus spoke plainly to his disciples, and when he used illustration, they were illustration that were simple, and easy to grasp - example, the sermon on the mount.
Other illustration were a bit more deep, but anyone who wanted to understand, just had to ask Jesus for the explanation, and they got it, but those who were not humble enough were left clueless. Matthew 13

This is the same way God operated. He was always clear.
Even the prophecies were explained - all of them.
The ones for the distant future were not for those alive, and so certain details were not given. What purpose would that serve?

What I think you should consider is, it all depends on God. He has to tell us if what Jesus said were all plain or not. Consider, the old testament, and the disagreements between Jewish interpretations and Christians. Do not make same objections, accusing Christians taking verses out of context, and reinterpreting them? What is the difference between what you are saying and what they have been saying? How can you even prove Jesus was Messiah?

Matthew 13:10-17
10 So the disciples came and said to him: “Why do you speak to them by the use of illustrations?” 11 In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted. 12 For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13 That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it. 14 And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see. 15 For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them.’ 16 “However, happy are your eyes because they see and your ears because they hear. 17 For truly I say to you, many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things you are observing but did not see them, and to hear the things you are hearing but did not hear them.

Matthew 11:25, 26
25 At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to young children. 26 Yes, O Father, because this is the way you approved.

Colossians 1:26, 27
26 the sacred secret that was hidden from the past systems of things and from the past generations. But now it has been revealed to his holy ones, 27 to whom God has been pleased to make known among the nations the glorious riches of this sacred secret, which is Christ in union with you, the hope of his glory.
1 Corinthians 2:9, 10

So, according to scripture and not interpretation, which seems designed to fit a religious belief, can we insist that Jesus meant God is literally His Father?

Not really. You need to consider that, when Jesus speaking to His apostles saying I have given you to understand the parables, this is specifically the apostles who are given the knowledge, not the entire Christian community. Look at so many places in Bible when Jesus speaks in parables. In almost none of them Jesus reveals what He actually means by those parables. It remains as is.
And when you use your own imagination to interpret them, wherefore it is your own personal interpretation. Cannot proof that is what actually Jesus meant.

Matthew 16:13-17
13 When he had come into the region of Caesarea Philippi, Jesus asked his disciples: “Who are men saying the Son of man is?” 14 They said: “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them: “You, though, who do you say I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father in the heavens did.

Most definitely - Jesus insisted that he is the son of God, and his followers believed this - through the Holy Spirit.

I did not say that, Jesus did not say He is the Son of God. Now show me where Jesus insisted that when Jesus said He is Son of God, He meant literally, and not Spiritually.

 

[oldbadger]

Or we could consider that maybe we should be more spiritually inclined.

I see it like asking a child to do nuclear pyhsics, maybe we are still not quite ready to understand the spiritual connection.

Regards Tony

But Bahai does not believe in spirits.
I see the Bahai version of the word 'spiritual' to be just another 'it' word.
Now a spiritualist who can perceive, receive from or communicate with spirits....... that can make some sense, but Bahai isn't in to that.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But Bahai does not believe in spirits.
I see the Bahai version of the word 'spiritual' to be just another 'it' word.
Now a spiritualist who can perceive, receive from or communicate with spirits....... that can make some sense, but Bahai isn't in to that.

What gave you that idea?

All that have passed on are Spirit, we all live here but in reality we are Spirit. Abdul'baha has explained the 5 levels of Spirit and how they interact. - Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 143-145

This is what Christ meant when He says we must be born again, to be born into the Spirit and when this is done one overcomes the 1st death.

What Baha'u'llah did say is difficult to know what is true Inspiration from the Spiritual Worlds of God and what is of our own imaginations based in the Material World, thus we are told not to foster these abilities.

"...Some miraculous feats are presumed to be linked with the development of latent psychic faculties in man. ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, the Beloved Master of the Bahá’í Faith, admits the reality of the ‘super normal’ psychic faculties, but deprecates attempts to force their premature development. "To tamper with psychic forces while in this world interferes with the condition of the soul in the world to come. These forces are real, but, normally, are not active on this plane."
‘Abdu’l-Bahá uses the example of a child in the womb to explain the idea. The child has eyes, ears, hands, feet, etc., but they are not in activity. Only once the child is born in the material world, do these organs become active. Similarly, psychic powers are not to be used in this world, and it is dangerous to cultivate them here.
When asked if a departed soul can converse with someone still on earth, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá answered, "A conversation can be held, but not as our conversation. There is no doubt that the forces of the higher worlds interplay with the forces of this plane. The heart of man is open to inspiration; this is spiritual communication. As in a dream one talks with a friend while the mouth is silent, so is it in the conversation of the spirit. A man may converse with the ego within him saying: ‘May I do this? Would it be advisable for me to do this work?’ Such as this is conversation with the higher self." Link to full discussion - Tempering with Psychic Forces

Regards Tony

 

[nPeace]

Yes, anyone can interpret a prophecy in anyway. But what this tells us?

What does it tell us? You'll have to tell me what you have in mind.
.

If anyone can fit the Prophcies, then how would God expect the True Christ be known from the false Christs? How would prophecies of an All-Wise God fit false Christs? Is God failing in representing false Christs from the true One?

I mentioned before - Unless specific details were given.
Specific details were given by all the prophets, concerning the coming Messiah, and Christ fulfilled those details. It seem as though you feel differently.
I think there is a problem because Bahsis are applying prophecies in Daniel and Revelation to future prophets and Messiahs. I believe that's where we get problems in interpretations.

Well, the Bible says God has a Son. Quran says God does not have a Son. Bahai Scriptures say both of you are right. Jesus is Spiritually is Son of God, so, you Christians are right. God does not have a biological son, so Quran is right too.

Was it not easy?

Not quite.
The language you used can be a bit confusing. What do you mean by spiritual son, and since God is not physical, how could the term biological son apply to him.
Adam was a physical son of God, and God has spirit sons. So what exactly do you mean?
Also...
You didn't touch on the bit about Jesus being resurrected and ascending to heaven. Any reason why not?

The proclaimation of Bahaullah is very clear. He has proclaimed that He is the Return of Christ in the Glory of the Father prophesied by Jesus. Nothing less. Indeed He proclaimed that His Manifestation, is the Father coming down from Heaven.

Yes. A direct conflict with scriptures Hebrews 1:1, 2; Revelation 1:1-3; (Revelation 22:18-21
Which you left unresolved, because clearly they can't be resolved.
Bahaullah proclamation is his own - not scriptural prophecy.
.

Jesus said, He has many things to say, but they cannot bear it now. He also, said on that Day, you will no longer ask Him anything, because the Father Himself loves you. Well, put both of these statememts together it tells us, that Jesus Himself will not come on the Day, but the Father will come, and He has many things to say, which denotes the Gospel is not the final words of God, there will be many more God will say. This is how Bahaullah fulfils these prophecies.

That's Bahais interpretation, is it not?
Why do Bahais insist it is right, and not corrupt, while everyone else's is corrupt and wrong?
.

Agreed.

You agree there is no successor to Christ, mentioned in scripture?

Can you give one scriptural reason why we should accept a nineteenth century self proclaimed Messiah and prophet, that would later write books claiming to be from god?

The fulfilled prophecies. The new Revelation. The Person of Bahaullah is the greatest proof, but it needs good investigation.

fulfilled prophecies... according to Bahai's interpretation, and acceptance of a nineteenth century self proclaimed prophet calling himself Bab - Gate/Door - and claiming to be a modern day Elijah paving the way to a new Messiah.
The new Revelation... according to Bahai's interpretation, and acceptance of a nineteenth century self proclaimed prophet calling himself Bab - Gate/Door - and claiming to be a modern day Elijah paving the way to a new Messiah.
The Person of Bahaullah... according to Bahai's interpretation, and acceptance of a nineteenth century self proclaimed prophet calling himself Bab - Gate/Door - and claiming to be a modern day Elijah paving the way to a new Messiah, and a self proclaimed Messiah called Bahaullah.

Isn't that called circular reasoning?
You accept a nineteenth century self proclaimed Messiah and prophet because a nineteenth century self proclaimed Messiah and prophet said it.
Do you think that calls for good investigation, or reconsideration?
I think it's worth considering that the Bahai interpretation of scripture is wrong.
.

Yes, but just because there will be false Messiahs, does not mean, there won't be the real One. Right?

The real one came, right? The scriptures says he fulfilled what he was appointed to do on earth, and being still alive in heaven - which many deny, and yet say the scriptures are true - he will finish all things.

I didn't read anything in scripture that says, "New Messiahs will come. Look out for real Messiahs."
Rather, we read, "For false Messiahs and false prophets will arise... Do not listen to them."
The warning is given because God knew there would be imitations - fakes - that would arise and mislead many, according to the plan of the wicked one.

Cannot God self claim?

??? What does that mean? Self proclaimed Messiahs and prophets are not God.

 

[nPeace]

The Baha'is do interpret the Bible but we don't believe in a literal Satan and we certainly don't accuse those who have beliefs different from ours as being deceived by the Devil.

The Baha'is see God as working through all peoples and having inspired the main religions. That's very different from what the JWs believe.

We see the greater plan of God as the positive changes humanity has made including the establishment of the foundations of a lasting peace, the equality of men and women, the abolition of slavery, and a view that humanity is one.

Thanks for agreeing that Bahais do interpret scripture. Therefore it is possible that their interpretation is as corrupt as those they accuse of misinterpretation. True?

So because you don't see Satan as literal, does not mean your interpretation is right.
The scriptures say plainly that Satan misleads, opposes, fights/wars, lies, deceives, accuses, murders, tempts, and disguises, or tries to hide his true identity.
The scriptures directly says he has been judged along with wicked spirit forces in the heavenly place, and that he was cast from the realm of heaven, to the earth, and that he will be imprisoned so that he is unable to mislead persons on the earth.
If that's not real, then I'm tripping... but seriously, JWs belief are based on the Bible, not some idea that has no Biblical support.

What you interpret as the greater plan of God, is not what Daniel and the other prophets said.
Daniel 2:44, 45; Isaiah 9:6, 7; 11; 65; All these tell of the stump of Jesse - the Christ - being the king of God's kingdom in heaven, bringing peace to the earth.
It describes too, how he will do it.
Genesis 22:18 And by means of your offspring all nations of the earth will obtain a blessing for themselves because you have listened to my voice.

Luke 2:
12 And this is a sign for you: You will find an infant wrapped in strips of cloth and lying in a manger.” 13 Suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly army, praising God and saying:
14 “Glory in the heights above to God, and on earth peace among men of goodwill.”

Matthew 25:
31 “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne.
32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.
33 And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left.
2 Thessalonians 1:6-10

Of course not. Why are you asking a question you know the answer to?

The Baha'i Teachings reflect God's plan for humanity. Many of the Baha'is here can easily demonstrate truth of the Baha'i Teachings based on the Bible we both believe in. However I personally avoid arguments about religion. You have your belief and I have mine. Its is only because you and one of your JWs have publically accused the Baha'is of following Satan I am defending my faith. There is limited benefit for either of us going into depth about scripture we are unlikely to agree on.

So what? The Jews find that not one verse of the Tanakh supports Christ. That doesn't mean Jesus is not the Jewish Messiah. The truth or otherwise of the Baaha'u'llah stands or falls if He is who He says He is. You wish to disprove the Baha'i Teachings. Its a debate section of this forum. I'll happily defend my faith.

Okay. I understand your position.

Are you quoting this verse because the word Belial sounds a little like Baha'i? The Baha'i Faith is founded on the Oneness of God and His Prophets. We are not a pagan religion. Why don't you education yourself about other religions instead of quoting random verses?

No. I didn't quote the verse for the reason you assume adrian.
To be honest, you seem kind of touchy when it comes to defending your faith.
You even take the position of assuming that someone is uneducated about your faith, sort of like those that accuse others of being ignorant about science, just because they disagree with their beliefs.
Is that how you go about defending your faith?

Defending ones faith does not mean responding to questions that seem easy to address, or scripture that one feels they might be able to easily interpret. It means being able to show why what you believe is solidly based on what your claim is the truth - no matter who challenges it.

If you note my statement above, it reads, "The apostle Paul warned against interfaith at 2 Corinthians 6"
Then the scripture is quoted.
Why do you say I need to educate myself about the Bahai faith?
Do you imagine that I debate a topic I don't know about? I don't .
I am assuming you know what interfaith is. The scripture I used is on point with my statement.
If you don't want to discuss that point, you just have to say so. No need to attack my education status.

The Pharisees did, accuse the ordinary people of being uneducated about Jewish law.
I hope you don't go jumping to the conclusion that I am implying that you are like those Pharisees.
Jumping to conclusions can throw civility out the window too.

Why do you quote from this biblical book in such a manner? The dragon could be anything. Next you will be calling the Baha'i Faith the dragon or attributing one of its heads to us.

See what I mean.
I'm quoting scriptures to make particular points, which I state before, and it seems you think I should not do so. What manner should I quote it in, and what interpretation should I give it?
Would it be satisfactory if I used the Bahai's interpretation?
Would that be the proper manner?

Yes the dragon can be anything, if one interprets the scriptures however they want, but No. The dragon can't be anything, if one uses the scriptures as they are written.
The scripture identifies the dragon when it clearly, and unmistakably says, "So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him."

Clearly, the scriptures identify Satan the Devil as one in charge of angels, and losing a battle to the chief angel Michael, and being swiftly - like lightning - being evicted from heaven - God's dwelling place.

Either the scriptures are corrupt, or the Bahai's interpretation is.
It's no wonder you are getting so irritated.
Hopefully I won't be hearing that angels are not literal, and heaven is just an allegory.

There are aspects of the world's religious and political system that are progressive and in line God's will. The belief that the existing world order is the beast in the book of revelation if pure imagination from those who founded the JWs and were confused and agitated by the changes they saw in the world.

So you say. Not true though. Perhaps your interpretation again.
Both Daniel and John were told by an angel of God what the beasts represented. They are the ones who made it clear - an angel of God. The JWs didn't write the scriptures, like what Bab did for those who would later accepts his writings over the Bible - JWs follow the scriptures.

Peace.

 

[Trailblazer]

Now a spiritualist who can perceive, receive from or communicate with spirits....... that can make some sense, but Bahai isn't in to that.

Most Baha'is are not into that but I am... It makes sense to me to want to know what is in the great beyond if at all possible to access that information. I think it is possible to know more than what Baha'u'llah revealed, which is rather scanty.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It can't really be said that the bible is there when people don't want to hear it, because they're getting a lot of their violent hatred FROM the bible. The more murderous authors are right up their alley.

The bible to me shows the result of mans rejection of all the virtues. It is the virtues the Messengers bring and offer. The stories are recorded so we may choose to change our ways.

I ask do they inspire you to violence, or do they show you how futile violence is?

But we're also left on our own to consider what is good and evil, because it can't be accurately established with scriptures.

What is good and what is not good is very clearly defined in scriptures, just one principle taught across all Faiths indicates this is so . It is commonly called the golden rule. - Golden Rule - Wikipedia

It is the virtues we are asked to live, plain and simple.

Which makes messengers largely irrelevant.

I would see them as life itself, without the Messengers we do not have life, they are the Cause. We may prefer to live life how we see fit and the holy books record how that has unfolded since records began.

Maybe it is time for us to submit to the wisdom of the Messenger's?

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Thanks for agreeing that Bahais do interpret scripture. Therefore it is possible that their interpretation is as corrupt as those they accuse of misinterpretation. True?

It is Baha'u'llah that has given interpretation of the Scriptures that we mainly use. This is paramount to saying it is God that has given the interpretation we mainly use.

If we attempt or use an interpretation by another person outside of those official writings, will should note that is what we are doing.

Regards Tony

 

[1213]

...If we consider this passage, it does say that mankind will accept our One God and live in peace. Stands to reason that it will be a Unity of purpose that allows this to happen...

That is good point and good scripture. However, it is not against nations. We can have many nations that all hear God and follow Him. That is why I think it is not good to be against nations. We can be against wrong actions, like murders and lies, but nations are ok.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I think that one world order is bad idea.

I've noticed that Christianity is all about opposing a one world order until it's their world.

And what Wikipedia says in that is also contradictory, you can’t reject nationalism and at the same time ensure prosperity of nations.

Sure you can. When you realize your nation is no better than other nations, you can have policies that enrich all or at least as much as possible.

The Bahai Faith is in harmony with Muslim faith which contradicts the Bible, and the Christian Faith.

The problem is not if something contradicts the bible or Christianity, but if something contradicts reality or God.

If the bible or Christianity causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away!

Here Jesus, answered the question posed to him, saying that indeed the scribes are right about Elijah's coming, but then he confirmed that it was fulfilled - Elijah did come.

When Jesus sees Elijah and Moses, did he see Elijah or John? And given that no one knew what these guys looked like, how could they tell? Did they have those little "Hello ... My name is" tags?

When Peter misunderstood Jesus's intent He called Him Satan.

Matthew 16:3

I think we need to take it symbolically instead of literally, don't you?

Actually, I like to imagine that this is the key to a cipher and that anywhere Satan pops up in the gospels, we're actually talking about Peter.

The story improves, IMHO.

Now we see the true interpretation.

Of John. Not God. God didn't write it.

So, according to scripture and not interpretation, which seems designed to fit a religious belief, can we insist that Jesus meant God is literally His Father?

From a certain POV, everything in the universe is God's child, no?

You accept a nineteenth century self proclaimed Messiah and prophet because a nineteenth century self proclaimed Messiah and prophet said it.

I think I"m choking. Is it the crackers I'm eating, or irony?

??? What does that mean? Self proclaimed Messiahs and prophets are not God.

So, if Jesus claims to be the messiah, then ...?

I ask do they inspire you to violence, or do they show you how futile violence is?

I see no one in the bible who did much of anything.

What is good and what is not good is very clearly defined in scriptures, just one principle taught across all Faiths indicates this is so . It is commonly called the golden rule.

Mostly. Breaks apart if people like self-harm, though.

Maybe it is time for us to submit to the wisdom of the Messenger's?

If I claimed to be one, would you follow me? If not, why not?