And so He has returned and said ‘I am’ again. Christ did say He would return as the Father which is Baha’u’llah. Jesus said He would return with a ‘new name’ and a ‘new song’ which is none other than a new Revelation from God.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Yeshua Warned Baha'u'llah's "I Am" Statements are False
- Thread starter wizanda
- Start date
And so He has returned and said ‘I am’ again. Christ did say He would return as the Father which is Baha’u’llah. Jesus said He would return with a ‘new name’ and a ‘new song’ which is none other than a new Revelation from God.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
To whom are you speaking ?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Nonsense. The new name and new song are in Heaven after the purge of the earth and the final judgement.
Your bahaullah is no more Christ, or God, than the the Mesquite tree in my yard. At least the tree can't blaspheme.
Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5, Luke 21:8 He said, “Watch out that you don’t get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, "I Am (G1473 G1510)" and "The time is at hand". Therefore don’t follow them."
Yeshua warns this is how the world is deceived; thank you for trying to mislead people.
Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man will come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he will render to everyone according to his deeds.
The father is the Source of reality, the God Most High; no man can be the father.
It is ego driven for Baha'u'llah to claim to be the father, and "I Am" consciousness, it is not scriptural; plus he changed his name to fit.
The name 'jesus' is a word meaning a 'grub that shall tear away' (יסס - Isaiah 51:8); his real name Yeshua, tells us cryptically how the spirit of salvation (Isaiah 52:10 - Yeshua Elohim) was placed in the flesh of David (Psalms 89:19-21 = Isaiah 52:13-14 - Marred = Anointed).
The new name is referenced in the Bible as Zion Elohim in multiple places (Psalms 146:10, Psalms 147:12, Isaiah 52:7, etc).
According to theosophy who have a good comprehension of global theology; they perceive the new name of Christ to be 'Sananda' - A shortened version of 'Sanananda', the Son of the Creator (Brahma - Yahavah).
Plus the Pillar in the Temple of God, in Kabbalistic thinking is Sandalphon; who interacts with mankind for God.
Revelation 3:12 He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar (Sandalphon) in the temple of my God, and he will go out from there no more. I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God (Zion), the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God, and my own new name (Sananda).
When Yeshua said blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord (Matthew 23:39), we can show by Hebrew in the scriptures, that was always the same as the Flock (Zan (ציון ▬ צאן) Zion).
In my opinion.
Last edited:
You have said what you think about Baha’u’llah now let us tell you what we think about Jesus.
Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.
We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.
Leprosy may be interpreted as any veil that interveneth between man and the recognition of the Lord, his God. Whoso alloweth himself to be shut out from Him is indeed a leper, who shall not be remembered in the Kingdom of God, the Mighty, the All-Praised. We bear witness that through the power of the Word of God every leper was cleansed, every sickness was healed, every human infirmity was banished. He it is Who purified the world. Blessed is the man who, with a face beaming with light, hath turned towards Him.(Baha’u’llah)
I can't believe you're appealing to the Christian by saying, Baha'i supports Vampirism (Martyrism)...
God Bless you for being so lost spiritually, you don't even realize that was an automated response.
In my opinion.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It does?
From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:
...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
(28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)
...we cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá'ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá'u'lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic. As many times passages in the Gospel of St. John are quoted we may assume that it is his Gospel and much of it accurate.
(23 January 1944 to an individual believer)
When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)
We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)
Except for what has been explained by Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá, we have no way of knowing what various symbolic allusions in the Bible mean.
(31 January 1955 to an individual believer)
From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:
...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words.
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)
The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
May the Source bless you for sharing; I'll forgive Baha'u'llah on he addresses he could be wrong about Biblical contexts, as he doesn't know directly.
I've known since I was 5-6 years old the Gospel of John was made up, because of "I Am" statements; I just didn't have all the details until 25, when prophesied to come online, after doing advanced studying using Esword Bible software.
In my opinion.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Well said!Mark 13:5-6, Matthew 24:4-5, Luke 21:8 He said, “Watch out that you don’t get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, "I Am (G1473 G1510)" and "The time is at hand". Therefore don’t follow them."
When we examine the Gospels using the Strongs reference numbers to see the Greek references; it is very clear Yeshua didn't go around using "I Am" statements in Greek ("Ego I-mee"), and used them specifically for the God Most High - The Ultimate Source of our Reality.
It is physically impossible for a being to become the Source of reality, the "I Am" consciousness, as we're down near Hell; as it would mean the Source would become corrupted, like the nature of the materialistic reality.
These from the Kitab-i-Aqdas, clearly show Baha'u'llah is guilty of charges of teaching a being can be "I Am" consciousness:
160. Bahá’u’lláh also affirms that, in the spiritual realm, there is an “essential unity” between all the Manifestations of God. They all reveal the “Beauty of God,” manifest His names and attributes, and give utterance to His Revelation. In this regard, He states:
Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God!” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His name and His attributes, are made manifest in the world.
And, regarding His own relationship to God, He testifies:
When I contemplate, O my God, the relationship that bindeth me to Thee, I am moved to proclaim to all created things “verily I am God!”; and when I consider my own self, lo, I find it coarser than clay!
What people do not realize is all "I Am" consciousness - where people think they are their own mini gods down here near Hell, are to be removed shortly in a day by Holy Quantum Fire; as they are ego ("I Am") driven Tares - The Source has no "I Am" within it, and rejects it according to the texts:
Isaiah 47:8-10 “Now therefore hear this, you who are given to pleasures, who sit securely, who say in your heart, ‘I am, and there is no one else besides me. I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children.’ (9) But these two things shall come to you in a moment in one day, the loss of children and widowhood. They will come on you in their full measure, in the multitude of your sorceries, and the great abundance of your enchantments. (10) For you have trusted in your wickedness. You have said, ‘No one sees me.’ Your wisdom and your knowledge has perverted you. You have said in your heart, ‘I am, and there is no one else besides me.’
The terminology to 'hear the words in his heart' is a paraphrasing of Deuteronomy 29:19-27, where the Lake of Fire washes mankind, removing all the idolators in a Day; those who worship themselves as gods claiming they have "Peace", as they don't listen to the words prophesied globally are to be removed.
Then after we shall reign in the Age of Enlightenment; where everyone who understands the Source is beyond form, hasn't got an "I Am" consciousness.
Israel means "To Reign with the Source".
In my opinion.
Yeshua knew............
It does?
From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:
...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
(28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)
...we cannot be sure how much or how little of the four Gospels are accurate and include the words of Christ and His undiluted teachings, all we can be sure of, as Bahá'ís, is that what has been quoted by Bahá'u'lláh and the Master must be absolutely authentic. As many times passages in the Gospel of St. John are quoted we may assume that it is his Gospel and much of it accurate.
(23 January 1944 to an individual believer)
When 'Abdu'l-Bahá states we believe what is in the Bible, He means in substance. Not that we believe every word of it to be taken literally or that every word is the authentic saying of the Prophet.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)
We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)
Except for what has been explained by Bahá'u'lláh and 'Abdu'l-Bahá, we have no way of knowing what various symbolic allusions in the Bible mean.
(31 January 1955 to an individual believer)
From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:
...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words.
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)
The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
I used the word mostly authentic rather than wholly authentic. The major difference between the Quran and the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians are the words that can be directly attributable to their respective Founders. The Words in the Quran are directly attributable to Muhammad. The Words in the Gospels and Torah can not be directly attributable to Jesus and Moses in the same manner. However the Universal House of Justice goes on to clarify that both Revelations were under God’s Protection and the essential elements of what God wished His Manifestations to convey is recorded and preserved in their Holy Books. This clarification is based on the writings of Bahá’u’lláh Himself in the Kitab-i-Iqan.
So when Shoghi Effendi says not wholly authentic, I don’t see it as meaning not authentic. That seems clear from the Universal House of Justice’s elucidation.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
What seems clear to me from the Universal House of Justice’s elucidation is only that the essential elements of what God wished His Manifestations to convey came through in the Bible, but there is no way that the Words attributed to Jesus and Moses are the Words of Jesus and Moses. The Words in the Gospels and Torah cannot be directly attributable to Jesus and Moses, only indirectly attributed to them.
Moreover, authentic means of undisputed origin; genuine, and we do not even know who the authors of the Bible were.
The only passage I am aware of in the Kitab-i-Iqan that addresses the Bible (other than the passage where Baha’u’llah tells the Muslims it has not been corrupted, except in a few instances) is where Baha’u’llah says the Bible is ““His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 89
But what does that mean to be a God’s testimony? That is very much open to interpretation. It certainly does not mean God speaking; at best it is men speaking for God, men who are not inerrant Manifestations of God, like Baha’u’llah. Maybe you cannot see how that is problematic, but I can.
The Words of Bahá’u’lláh are very strongly in favour of the text of the Gospels that exists amongst the Christians. Perhaps the most strongly worded verses from the Kitab-i-Iqan has 89-90 are as follows:
We have also heard a number of the foolish of the earth assert that the genuine text of the heavenly Gospel doth not exist amongst the Christians, that it hath ascended unto heaven. How grievously they have erred! How oblivious of the fact that such a statement imputeth the gravest injustice and tyranny to a gracious and loving Providence! How could God, when once the Day-star of the beauty of Jesus had disappeared from the sight of His people, and ascended unto the fourth heaven, cause His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures, to disappear also? What would be left to that people to cling to from the setting of the day-star of Jesus until the rise of the sun of the Muḥammadan Dispensation? What law could be their stay and guide? How could such people be made the victims of the avenging wrath of God, 90 the omnipotent Avenger? How could they be afflicted with the scourge of chastisement by the heavenly King? Above all, how could the flow of the grace of the All-Bountiful be stayed? How could the ocean of His tender mercies be stilled? We take refuge with God, from that which His creatures have fancied about Him! Exalted is He above their comprehension!
So to me the heavenly Gospel does exist amongst the Christians as is clearly stated by Bahá’u’lláh Himself. If I found a contradiction between what I know of the Gospels and the Baha’i Writings I might see it differently. Even the words of the Apostles testify to their divine inspiration.
However the verses are not all literal and the historical and textural context needs careful analysis.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
To my knowledge. the Apostles did not write the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
No, the Gospels do not contradict the Baha'i Writings. Somehow, the truth came through, even though it was not the Words of Jesus.
What would be left to that people to cling to from the setting of the day-star of Jesus until the rise of the sun of the Muḥammadan Dispensation? What law could be their stay and guide?
To me, that means that the Christians should have accepted Muhammad instead of clinging to the Gospels.
I can't believe you're appealing to the Christian by saying, Baha'i supports Vampirism (Martyrism)...
God Bless you for being so lost spiritually, you don't even realize that was an automated response.
In my opinion.
It is a tribute to Jesus and that we believe in Him fully and that anyone who follows and obeys His teachings of love is very blest.
The Four Gospels were written after Him [Christ]. John, Luke, Mark and Matthew - these four wrote after Christ what they remembered of His utterances. (Baha’u’llah)
(From a previously untranslated Tablet)
The Bible
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I have seen that quote before, but what do we know about that translation?
Religious scholars say that it is impossible that the disciples wrote the Gospels.
When were the gospels written and by whom?
The Gospel of Mark probably dates from c. AD 66–70, Matthew and Luke around AD 85–90, and John AD 90–110. Despite the traditional ascriptions all four are anonymous, and none were written by eyewitnesses. Like the rest of the New Testament, they were written in Greek.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki › Gospel
If you lived in the time of Jesus and were one of His disciples would you have left nothing to posterity of the beautiful truths He taught? His disciples obviously found ways to pass down what they were taught.
If taken in context, Bahá’u’lláh is criticising the Muslim leaders and scholars for discounting the Christian scriptures as corrupt. He is not writing a polemic against the Christians for rejecting Muhammad. I’ve come to appreciate that one of the most important factors for a successful Interfaith dialogue between the Abrahamic Faiths is a genuine appreciation of each other’s sacred writings. Obviously the most important factor is our courteous, respectful and friendly predisposition. However as soon as the conversation becomes my sacred writings are genuine and yours is corrupt and obsolete, then great damage is done. That is the history between the Muslims and the Christians from the medieval period when Muslim scholars took this approach. Why should the Christians convert to a religion that doesn’t respect their scriptures?
Hi Adrian. The other day we had a Beautiful multi-cultural, multi-racial and multi-religious pot luck lunch at our home. I was asked to speak and how I spoke could have been the difference between the outbreak of WW3 or the Most Great Peace. Luckily I found some beautiful prayers and readings like “ Unite all, let the religions agree and make the nations one..... and we had a glorious time with awesome food. Curry, ice cream and chocolate with the children who came playing and enjoying and the adults having a grand time.
I’m most glad I did behave myself that once and didn’t unsheathe the ‘sword of my tongue’ as I have often done and it led to a beautiful joyous peace amongst the races, religions and nationalities. But then it wasn’t a debating forum so there is a time and place for good debates to be had. (Here) So it was Salam to the Muslim, Namaste to the Hindu and God Bless to the Christian and it was a challenge because in such a diverse environment it can be very tricky to make sure the tongue is kept on a leash. (A first for me- miracles do happen after all)
Building bridges is not that easy but Baha’u’llah does it perfectly in pointing out the oneness and validity of all the major Faiths and its a wonderful feeling when we do get it right but it requires a lot of sensitivity to the feelings of others which more often than not I have lacked. But it was a great eye opener. All the people here are beautiful and I learn from them all but regardless of different understandings I deeply love and respect the awesome diversity here on this forum.