Does the Bible mention Islam?

[Marcion]

To say the Bible isn't worth the paper it is written on and that it's unreliable is, sadly, what is the negative extreme of what Baha'is believe. There is not one thing in the Bible, and especially the NT, that Baha'is need to believe. They, instead, can take the Baha'i symbolic interpretation and erase any belief Christians may hold as truth.

That is what practically all the Abrahamic faiths do, they twist the meaning of (an)other Abrahamic faith(s) to fit it (them) into their own fictional narrative.
The Bahai do this in a slightly more sophisticated way.
It gives them a good feeling that they have "corrected" the other faiths and have "updated the narative" to make it "better" or "better suited for modern times".
Among each other they do not like this behaviour of making up new religious narratives and folk outside the Abahamic ways of thinking don't take any of it seriously because they have no use for such types of religious narratives.

 

[CG Didymus]

That is what practically all the Abrahamic faiths do, they twist the meaning of (an)other Abrahamic faith(s) to fit it (them) into their own fictional narrative.
The Bahai do this in a slightly more sophisticated way.
It gives them a good feeling that they have "corrected" the other faiths and have "updated the narative" to make it "better" or "better suited for modern times".
Among each other they do not like this behaviour of making up new religious narratives and folk outside the Abahamic ways of thinking don't take any of it seriously because they have no use for such types of religious narratives.

And the meanings are so twistable. Baha'is take "Three Woes" from the Book of Revelation, that are nothing but bad things that are going to happen because people are so evil and not good like God intended, and they make them three prophets... Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah. How is a "Woe" a prophet? I have no idea. But Baha'is know how. They found one verse in Ezekiel chapter 30 that says,“The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Howl ye, Woe worth the day! For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near.” Doesn't seem obvious, a "woe" means the day of Lord is near, right? No, I asked if every time the Book of Revelation mentions a "woe" is it referring to a prophet of God appearing, and they said "no". It was only these three "woes".

But let's twist again, or twist and shout or listen to some Twisted Sister backwards (for those of you that don't get these references to "twisting" you can pray for the Lord to open your eyes, or just look up Chubby Checker, the Isley Brothers and Twisted Sister). Anyway, another big Baha'i twist is the "Two Witnesses" in another chapter in Revelation. One witness is Muhammad. The other is Ali. But nobody ever knew this until Baha'is told them. Christians had the book and never imagined that their own book had chapters devoted to Islam in it. Muslims didn't know it either. But that might be because Baha'is say a lot of the things in Revelation, the evil beasts and the evil dragons, are about the corrupt leaders of Islam.

The biggest twist for me is how Baha'is make the "number" or "mark" of the beast the year 661AD. People get this mark on their hands or forehead. Without it, they can't buy of sell. How is that a date? I don't know. But by doing the Baha'i twist... anything is possible. But, like you say, all the Abrahamics are doing it.

 

[david-david]

John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."


061:006

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."

 

[CG Didymus]

It is God who forgives and is the compassionate. Why do you make an issue of people who don't believe as the born again Christians do? You don't believe it yourself.

Muslims and Jews are entited to their different beliefs about God. They Follow the Teachings of Muhamamd and Moses. That is how they are saved.

If the NT is true and the Word of God, I believe the "born again" Christians are the best at interpreting it as such. Baha'is don't. Baha'is have to change meanings and interpretation to get the NT to fit their beliefs. But, if the NT is not the Word of God, but the best guesses and recollections of men who heard Jesus or at least heard the stories about him then wrote them down... then how accurate is that? And Baha'is don't believe it is totally authentic. Baha'is believe that Jewish Scribes added verses in to make Isaac the son to be sacrificed. That's not believing in the Bible. Baha'i change the Bible as needed.

The NT says that Jesus forgave a person's sins. Something that supposedly only God can do. There are places where the name Jesus is mentioned as the one returning. That eliminates Muhammad and Baha'u'llah. Or, the writers of the NT got it wrong and Jesus was made into a god by those writers. I'd be fine with that. Or, I'd be fine with Jesus being part of a Godhead and is the one coming back. The Christian interpretation makes Islam and The Baha'i Faith, and every other religion, false. Baha'is, with a lot of reinterpretation and getting rid of a lot of beliefs in the other religions, makes them all one. Neither the Baha'is nor the Christians answers enough of my questions to be convincing.

The Baha'i interpretation of very few parts of Revelation makes their case worse, not better. The "Lamb" that was slain was said by one Baha'i to be The Bab. The Lamb is at the right hand of God. The Lamb has a "Book of Life". The Lamb is the "Lord of Lords" and "King of Kings". This sounds a lot like Christians meant this to be Jesus. But, since all manifestations are essentially equal, then Muhammad should be even more prominent in the prophecies. He was the very next return of Christ. But, he isn't.

Anyway, for you to say that I don't "believe" in the Bible isn't exactly how I feel. I think it is more accurate to say that I question it... As I do the Baha'i Faith.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Anyway, for you to say that I don't "believe" in the Bible isn't exactly how I feel. I think it is more accurate to say that I question it... As I do the Baha'i Faith.

So what are your beliefs and conclusions?

Does God exist?

Who was Jesus relative to God.

Is God an exclusive God who accepts the right kind of Christians?

Does heaven and hell exist?

Does the soul continue after death?

What do you need to do to be saved?

Did Jesus rise from the dead and ascend to heaven literally as recorded in the Gospels?

Was Jesus physically God incarnate?

Was Jesus the son of God?

Is God triune?

What is the truth of the Bible?

Neither the Baha'is nor the Christians answers enough of my questions to be convincing.

It is not the responsibility of either Baha’is or Christians to convince you. Only to answer your questions the best we can. It is absolutely your responsibility to make decisions and determine the truth. No one can do that for you.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Baha'is don't. Baha'is have to change meanings and interpretation to get the NT to fit their beliefs.

CG, that is not so. The same accusation could be used for all past Messengers and Prophets. None have come on a clear day, as all have come on the clouds.

Baha'u'llah stands by the Message He gave, not by the promise of what was to come. That was for our benefit and not because Baha'u'llah needed to fit into Prophecy.

As for prophecy, He fulfilled prophecy in the ways that He has described, or He did not. Baha'u'llah does not need our approval or our rejection. Again that becomes our chosen path.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

So what are your beliefs and conclusions?

If neither the Baha'is nor the Christians are convincing, then that means I haven't made any conclusions.

Does God exist?

Who was Jesus relative to God.

Is God an exclusive God who accepts the right kind of Christians?

Does heaven and hell exist?

Does the soul continue after death?

What do you need to do to be saved?

Did Jesus rise from the dead and ascend to heaven literally as recorded in the Gospels?

Was Jesus physically God incarnate?

Was Jesus the son of God?

Is God triune?

What is the truth of the Bible?

Does an All-Loving spirit being that is unknowable and can't be seen? He doesn't seem all loving. And, he doesn't seem like a good manager of His creation. Christians solve the problem by saying a created spirit being turned evil and it's his fault for all the bad things in the world. God gave the first two humans the chance to choose what is right, but they listened to this evil being. God had no choice but to curse the humans and the Earth. How do Baha'is justify all the evil, disasters and disease in the world? That was God's plan? So we have multiple definitions of who God is. So, even if God exists, which definition of Him is right. You say not the Christians. Christians say not the Baha'is.

All the rest of them depend on Christianity being right or wrong. So it comes down to the last one... what is the truth about the Bible? And I separate the Jewish part from the Christian part. So is the New Testament the truth? Baha'is contradict the belief of early Christianity. They believed Jesus rose from the dead. If he didn't... The NT is false. The story about Jesus can't be trusted as being the truth, therefore any beliefs Christians developed from the NT are false.

Baha'is are the ones that say those things are not true. But, then after declaring that all those thing are false, Baha'i praise how true the NT is? What is true about it? Nothing. Jesus didn't do the things that the NT alleges. Who knows what he really said. Did he talk about heaven and hell as real? Or did the writers add those things in to appeal to Pagan beliefs? Is Jesus the only and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world? That's what the NT writers say. Saved by grace, through faith and that not of your own, but it's a gift from God so no man can boast. And that faith is in Jesus being the Son of God and the propitiation for your sins.

I guess the soul thing can be separated out of the list. So how do we know the soul continues? By "near-death experiences"? My sister gave me a CD about a kid that went to heaven and came back. He saw his brother there. A brother that had died before he was born and that he didn't know about. How is that possible? Pretty convincing huh? But, it was a Christian heaven. So is the Christian heaven real? I don't know. The Baha'i afterlife sounds better... except, with no hell, how does God punish evil people?

If those evil doers are farther away from God, what's it like for them? Is it dark and cold? If it filled with heat and torment? Then, it is close enough to being like the Christian hell. Unless, after spending time there, they get to move closer to God? If so, then it's another lie taught by Jesus and the NT. Where it says their torment will last forever. But, with the Baha'is, what do evil people do to pay for their evil deeds? Do some of them get a reduced sentence for good behavior? Do some continue to do evil?

How about even the "good" people. Can they still choose to do good or to do evil? If there is no choice, if all they can do is be kind and loving, why didn't God just skip the Earth stage and go right to this spiritual world? Why put people in a place where there is plenty of evil, tons of misinformation, supposedly from Him, and then expect people to always do good? And, since nobody is perfectly good, then God knew and created people in a way hat they would fail.

It is not the responsibility of either Baha’is or Christians to convince you. Only to answer your questions the best we can. It is absolutely your responsibility to make decisions and determine the truth. No one can do that for you.

What? If you tell me what you believe and you're not convincing, what does that mean? That you're not very good at presenting your message. And Baha'is, even Abdul Baha, haven't been convincing. And what is the responsibility of the other person? It is to check out the things that were said. Are the true? Are they kind of true? Do they contradict what others say is true? When each side explains their views on those contradictions, are either one of them convincing?

No, neither the Baha'is nor the Christians nor their Scriptures are convincing, because it is in the very Scriptures where the contradictions begin. The most convincing argument I've ever seen from the Baha'is is the 1260 years. But then when I point out that such and such a thing happened, after the starting date of the 1260 years, then that thing stopped happening... what ever it was 3 1/2 days or forty two months or another 1260 days, Baha'is revert back to the same starting date of 621AD, so they can end on 1844? I think the example I used was the Umayyads... the supposed beast. They start after 621Ad and last for a few hundred years, but still Baha'is twist the verses from Revelation to make this beast start at 621AD? And end in 1844?

Sorry, that is not convincing. And it is my responsibility? Ah, yes... it is my responsibility to "determine" the truth. Well, that's different. The Baha'i explanation doesn't sound like the truth and is not convincing. But, the jury is still listening to any evidence you might want to present. And who's responsibility is it to present evidence for what you say is true?

 

[CG Didymus]

CG, that is not so. The same accusation could be used for all past Messengers and Prophets. None have come on a clear day, as all have come on the clouds.

Baha'u'llah stands by the Message He gave, not by the promise of what was to come. That was for our benefit and not because Baha'u'llah needed to fit into Prophecy.

As for prophecy, He fulfilled prophecy in the ways that He has described, or He did not. Baha'u'llah does not need our approval or our rejection. Again that becomes our chosen path.

Regards Tony

How is that not so? You change the interpretation of what Christians say. Who knows... Baha'is might be right. But, you do it. Christians say Jesus rose again. Baha'is say he didn't. You change what Christians say to something that fits what the Baha'i Faith believes.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But, the jury is still listening to any evidence you might want to present. And who's responsibility is it to present evidence for what you say is true?

It is no one elses except your responsibility to determine what may be true or may be false.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

How is that not so? You change the interpretation of what Christians say. Who knows... Baha'is might be right. But, you do it. Christians say Jesus rose again. Baha'is say he didn't. You change what Christians say to something that fits what the Baha'i Faith believes.

You would be saying those that accepted a Message all changed the past scriptures to suit that acceptance.

The Jews accuse the Christians, Muslims and Baha'i of changing Scripture. Then the same for Christains and Muslims who do use the same argument. But it was Jesus, Muhammad, Bab and Baha'u'llah that claimed to be the Messengers. They are who they claim to be or not, what they offer us is Truth or it is not.

A Baha'i accepts their explanations and it is only Baha'u'llah that has clearly shown all Messengers are from the same source, that God is One.

I wish you well CG, I will remember you in prayer at the Holy Shrines.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

If neither the Baha'is nor the Christians are convincing, then that means I haven't made any conclusions.

Thanks for your considered response CG.

As you have said, at the end of your post, it is your responsibility to determine the truth. That truth you choose at some stage must be convincing to you. It sounds as if nothing convinces you but I wonder if anything can? Is it the position of the sceptic and cynic of which the Greeks spoke of? Is it not symptomatic of the age we live in? Everything is being questioned. Humanity has lost faith in all the foundations of the civilisation. There is no certainly to be found anywhere.

I wonder what its like for you being undecided? I know what it was like for me many years ago in my early twenties finding myself disillusioned with life and Christianity. Encouraged by the words of Jesus (John 8:32 and Matthew 7:7-8) I set out to find the truth, not knowing where that would lead and initially never having heard about the Baha'i Faith. It took me 5 years to become a Baha'i. But I look back at the first year of my search and God had directed me to live in a flatting situation with 12 others, one who was a Baha'i. He had a poster of the 12 principles of the Baha'i faith in the dining room for us all to see each evening when we sat down for a meal together. We took it in turns to cook. My Baha'i flatmate would often make the effort to serve me in some way. At that stage I was to enmeshed in my Christian Faith to make so radical a change. One time we discussed the nature of hell and learned I was not convinced about the Christian view of hell. After one year I had left the church and became disaffected with Christianity.

I don't know what being undecided is like for you, but I'm one of those people who needs a few certainties in life. Being undecided was not a happy place, nor was being disaffected with Christianity. Christianity was the religion I had grown up with and the faith of my ancestors.

One thing that turned my life around was remembering the power of prayer. Long story short and three years later I prayed for guidance to be directed to a faith community of like minded people. A few days later the answer came with my flatmate being invited to a Baha'i meeting. She couldn't make it but my other flatmate and I decided to go along. At that stage I was ready to seriously investigate the Baha'i Faith and after 8 months decided it was probably true. I was far from convinced but as I applied the Baha'i Teachings to my life, I became stronger and more certain. A few years later I felt called to study medicine.

During my second year of medical studies we were given the option of doing some elective studies that could be unrelated to the study of medicine. My Christian ex-girlfriend classmate and I decided we would study the return of Christ together. We have a world class theological seminary in my city, so began the journey of full on discussions with the Christian apologetics.

Eventually I came to realise one of the most challenging Christian beliefs to reconcile from a Baha'i perspective was the Christian resurrection narrative. On becoming a Baha'i it didn't really bother me if Jesus came back from the dead or He didn't. However on reading Abdu'l-Baha's comment in some answered question, he highlights the obvious. The ascension of Christ through the stratosphere to be with his father in the literal heavens (outer space) makes no sense. So we have to reconcile this with the gospel accounts that can appear to be a compelling testimony to an historic event. For a while I struggled to reconcile it in my own head, but now it makes perfect sense. The belief in a literal resurrection is a great example of the clouds that Jesus would appear on (Matthew 24:30). That was another verse I struggled with, but what are clouds? They are both lofty heavenly bodies that can also obscure the sunlight to the extent we can't see the sun at all. The belief in a literal resurrection is certainly a great barrier between the seeker and what he desires.

CG, soon our short lives will be over. If the Christians or Baha'is are correct our souls will pass from this world to the next. We will be judged by God and our progress in the next world will be dependant on certain criteria of which the Bible and the Baha'i writings are in agreement.

1/ The recognition of the Manifestation of God for this day (John 14:6)
2/ Living the life (James 2:14-26)

You will have in your defence your online discussions with the Baha'is on RF. We weren't convincing enough.

 

[Dawnofhope]

John 21:25 "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."


061:006

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic."

I'm wondering why you have posted these two quotes, one from the bible, the other from the Quran?

 

[Dawnofhope]

That is what practically all the Abrahamic faiths do, they twist the meaning of (an)other Abrahamic faith(s) to fit it (them) into their own fictional narrative.
The Bahai do this in a slightly more sophisticated way.
It gives them a good feeling that they have "corrected" the other faiths and have "updated the narative" to make it "better" or "better suited for modern times".
Among each other they do not like this behaviour of making up new religious narratives and folk outside the Abahamic ways of thinking don't take any of it seriously because they have no use for such types of religious narratives.

Isn't that what you have done with your Q-lite version of what Jesus taught? You have tried to come up with a version of what Christ taught to suit your particular worldview?

You have been giving the Baha'is a lot of funny frubbles recently. What's that about other than to say you disagree with our worldview?

 

[Marcion]

Isn't that what you have done with your Q-lite version of what Jesus taught? You have tried to come up with a version of what Christ taught to suit your particular worldview?

You have been giving the Baha'is a lot of funny frubbles recently. What's that about other than to say you disagree with our worldview?

It just happens that what Jesus taught coincides with the Tantric approach to life.
I did not change a single word in the text, they are the words of Yeshua himself (unlike the ones in the Christian redactions). Although a reconstruction is always a tentative affair if the diverse authors have done so much redactive work.

I think certain Abrahamic ways of thinking are funny and it is nice that you can express such feelings on this forum. Spiritual philosophy can be very serious stuff, so it is nice that there is also a lighter note every now and then.
I hope it is not experienced as disrespectful.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Does an All-Loving spirit being that is unknowable and can't be seen? He doesn't seem all loving. And, he doesn't seem like a good manager of His creation. Christians solve the problem by saying a created spirit being turned evil and it's his fault for all the bad things in the world. God gave the first two humans the chance to choose what is right, but they listened to this evil being. God had no choice but to curse the humans and the Earth. How do Baha'is justify all the evil, disasters and disease in the world? That was God's plan? So we have multiple definitions of who God is. So, even if God exists, which definition of Him is right. You say not the Christians. Christians say not the Baha'is.

I think God is doing a great job. Humanity on the other hand, not so good. You know the story. God gives man the free will to turn to Him and His Great Teachers.

Do Baha’is Believe Humanity Has A Purpose?

Coming to terms with suffering and the nature of evil another perennial dilemma for seekers of truth.

Why Do We Suffer?

Suffering, The Meaning of

How Do You Define Evil?

As for the nature of God....

God in the Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia

An Unknowable God | What Bahá’ís Believe

All the rest of them depend on Christianity being right or wrong. So it comes down to the last one... what is the truth about the Bible? And I separate the Jewish part from the Christian part. So is the New Testament the truth? Baha'is contradict the belief of early Christianity. They believed Jesus rose from the dead. If he didn't... The NT is false. The story about Jesus can't be trusted as being the truth, therefore any beliefs Christians developed from the NT are false.

Isn’t that a false dichotomy?

false dichotomy - Wiktionary

Don’t worry, it’s a common enough logical fallacy.

Baha'is are the ones that say those things are not true. But, then after declaring that all those thing are false, Baha'i praise how true the NT is? What is true about it? Nothing. Jesus didn't do the things that the NT alleges. Who knows what he really said. Did he talk about heaven and hell as real? Or did the writers add those things in to appeal to Pagan beliefs? Is Jesus the only and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world? That's what the NT writers say. Saved by grace, through faith and that not of your own, but it's a gift from God so no man can boast. And that faith is in Jesus being the Son of God and the propitiation for your sins.

So the Bible is either literally true or it’s false?

4 Good Reasons Not to Read the Bible Literally | HuffPost

Biblical literalism - Wikipedia

I guess the soul thing can be separated out of the list. So how do we know the soul continues? By "near-death experiences"? My sister gave me a CD about a kid that went to heaven and came back. He saw his brother there. A brother that had died before he was born and that he didn't know about. How is that possible? Pretty convincing huh? But, it was a Christian heaven. So is the Christian heaven real? I don't know. The Baha'i afterlife sounds better... except, with no hell, how does God punish evil people?

To be clear the Baha’is do believe in hell, but as a separation from God.

Do Baha’is Believe in Hell?

If those evil doers are farther away from God, what's it like for them? Is it dark and cold? If it filled with heat and torment? Then, it is close enough to being like the Christian hell. Unless, after spending time there, they get to move closer to God? If so, then it's another lie taught by Jesus and the NT. Where it says their torment will last forever. But, with the Baha'is, what do evil people do to pay for their evil deeds? Do some of them get a reduced sentence for good behavior? Do some continue to do evil?

In regards an afterlife...

Do Baha’is Believe in Life After Death?

God’s judgement when we die....

Judgement

What happens to evil people when they die? First consider crime and punishment in this world.

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 268-272

Now in the afterlife

The Nature of Evil—and Divine Forgiveness

No, neither the Baha'is nor the Christians nor their Scriptures are convincing, because it is in the very Scriptures where the contradictions begin. The most convincing argument I've ever seen from the Baha'is is the 1260 years. But then when I point out that such and such a thing happened, after the starting date of the 1260 years, then that thing stopped happening... what ever it was 3 1/2 days or forty two months or another 1260 days, Baha'is revert back to the same starting date of 621AD, so they can end on 1844? I think the example I used was the Umayyads... the supposed beast. They start after 621Ad and last for a few hundred years, but still Baha'is twist the verses from Revelation to make this beast start at 621AD? And end in 1844?

1844 is 1260 on the Islamic calendar. What could be clearer?

The Christian calendar starts from the birth of Christ. The Umayyads came to power 666 years after the birth of Christ.

The day for a year approach is well established in Christianity. 3 1/2 years equals 42 months equals 1260 days.

It’s one of the clearest fulfilment of prophecy know.

 

[Dawnofhope]

It just happens that what Jesus taught coincides with the Tantric approach to life.
I did not change a single word in the text, they are the words of Yeshua himself (unlike the ones in the Christian redactions). Although a reconstruction is always a tentative affair if the diverse authors have done so much redactive work.

It’s good you have a view of the Teachings of Jesus that makes sense for you. Obviously the Baha’is have the known Bible as starting point and there’s nothing we’re saying that modern biblical scholars aren’t saying. It’s two different approaches that clearly work for each of us.

I think certain Abrahamic ways of thinking are funny and it is nice that you can express such feelings on this forum. Spiritual philosophy can be very serious stuff, so it is nice that there is also a lighter note every now and then.
I hope it is not experienced as disrespectful.

I’m pleased we amuse you. CG and I have been talking for nearly two years on this forum. Although we discuss serious theological issues we both try to keep it light and friendly. I don’t believe it’s helpful for one person to push their beliefs on another. Accepting and appreciating diversity is far more important than being able to prove ourselves right and others wrong.

 

[Shad]

A Baha'i accepts their explanations and it is only Baha'u'llah that has clearly shown all Messengers are from the same source, that God is One.

This merely validates the criticism in previous posts. You admit you follow a specific interpretation post hoc which tailors previous views to match the one you accept.

 

[Marcion]

Obviously the Baha’is have the known Bible as starting point and there’s nothing we’re saying that modern biblical scholars aren’t saying. It’s two different approaches that clearly work for each of us..

The problem with most biblical scholars is that they do not have any knowledge of or access to the Tantric approach that is hidden in the Q-lite teachings of Yeshua.
Christianity is a big shift away from the Tantric teachings of Yeshua, so following most biblical scholars brings you in a paradigmatic cull-the-sac.

The real connection to universal spirituality is always Tantric and can never be found in religious theoretical speculations. Proclaiming that all religions are one is meaningless entertainment if you are unable to explain or demonstrate in which teachings that unity is to be found.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The problem with most biblical scholars is that they do not have any knowledge of or access to the Tantric approach that is hidden in the Q-lite teachings of Yeshua.
Christianity is a big shift away from the Tantric teachings of Yeshua, so following most biblical scholars brings you in a paradigmatic cull-the-sac.

The real connection to universal spirituality is always Tantric and can never be found in religious theoretical speculations. Proclaiming that all religions are one is meaningless entertainment if you are unable to explain in which teachings that unity is to be found.

The Teachings of Baha'u'llah bring unity as He is the Manifestation of God for this day. The Abrahamic lineages affirms this with a clear progression of Divine Revelation through Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and more recently the Bab and Baha'u'llah. The lineage of known Spiritual Teachings through Krishna and Buddha is supportive too though we have no way of being certain exactly what either of them taught. As you find a best fit with the Q-lite teachings for Jesus, a best fit analysis for Buddha will be based on the available Suttas and the Bhagavad Gita for Krishna. These Teachers all accessed the Eternal Dharma and made them known to millions through their Teachings. Anyone can assess the Eternal Dharma to some degree. Only the Manifestations of God have perfected these Teachings in both word and deed. They all have a proven record as Their Teachings have transformed the lives of countless followers throughout the ages.

There are many groups that have obscure and esoteric teachings where a relatively small band of elites claim enlightenment. They claim to have transcended the need for Universal Teachers such as Christ, Muhammad and Buddha. However the historic momentum is with the Universal Teachers outlined whose legacy is undeniable.

 

[Marcion]

There are many groups that have obscure and esoteric teachings where a relatively small band of elites claim enlightenment. They claim to have transcended the need for Universal Teachers such as Christ, Muhammad and Buddha. However the historic momentum is with the Universal Teachers outlined whose legacy is undeniable.

The reverse is true, it is the exoteric teachings that are obscure and sectarian (each sects has its own competing elites). Suggesting that they form a "unified line of universal teachers" is not true in the way that you seem to want to understand it.

Only so far as some of those teachers were Tantric are they connected. So not connected in some mythical way as with some theorized "holy plan of succession" but in a real sense through the unity of their teachings.

If you are still not able to understand the nature of those teachings that is not something to be ashamed of. But it also does not give you the right to take a hostile or aggressive stance as happens in many exoteric sects including Christianity (with an ancient history of persecution of esoterics).

The sad irony of course is that it's probably so that Yeshua was himself eliminated because of his Tantric teachings and his opposition to the exoteric fraud of religious priests.

You left one exoteric sect and embraced another with a slightly less sectarian outlook.
God or Self-realisation however cannot be found in an exoteric way (no matter how shiny the appearance). The question is whether you are ready yet to turn that switch or not.