• 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!

Biblical prophecies and statements. Are they about Jesus Christ or Bahaullah?

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
That doesn't have anything to do with God coming down as a person to save us and to teach us how to live and to reconcile us back to a relationship with God. How can Jesus be both God and the Son of God? | CARM.org
Well, we are not disagreeing about Jesus as the Messiah, Son of God, or that He came down from heaven.

However it is the matter of interpretation, what does it mean, Jesus is Messiah, Son of God or He came down from Heaven. You seem to take a very literal approach, which is the way mainstream Christians take.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
My understanding is, The child is not really physically a person. But it is the reality of the Bab. That woman symbolically represent Laws of Islam, which was going to give birth to Mahdi. Now, the Bab, is Mahdi, but here, the child represents, the new people who was born by manifestation of the Bab. So, this child is the followers of the Bab. Before this child knows true from false, the Bab was martyred. So, then the Land was left without any guidance. That is the meaning of the land of two kings becomes dry. Next verses, talks about Assyria, which is the land of Iraq and northern Turkey, where Bahaullah first declared. Then you see, there will be abundant.a person can have a cow and two goats. These are symbolic, and by abundance, it is meant, abundance in receiving guidance from God. This is abundance in spiritual food, which in practice was because of the abundance in revelations of Bahaullah, or the tablets and verses He was revealing.
This story from a Bahai point of view will have to be interpreted spiritually.
So the story I was told about King Ahaz having two enemy Kings and how they both die didn't happen? And since this virgin born child is The Bab, then this verse has nothing to do about Jesus?
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
The correct translation is not virgin. It is young woman. The rest of the verses don't match with Jesus.
I agree with you. So why do Baha'is support the belief in the virgin birth of Jesus?

Yeah, what about those?

Genesis 18 is symbolic. Bible clearly says, God is an invisible spirit.
Of course. The old, if we can't explain it or don't like what it is saying, it must be symbolic. But if we have a spirit and a body why can't God and his angels? Does any other religion have a problem with spirit beings materializing? If not, then why, all of a sudden, do the Baha'is?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Well, we are not disagreeing about Jesus as the Messiah, Son of God, or that He came down from heaven.

However it is the matter of interpretation, what does it mean, Jesus is Messiah, Son of God or He came down from Heaven. You seem to take a very literal approach, which is the way mainstream Christians take.

That's what the Bible says. God in the Old Testament appeared as Jesus because Jesus said nobody has seen the Father. God was seen in the Old Testament. Who was it? | CARM.org

God was seen in the Old Testament. Who was it?
Oneness Pentecostal theology teaches that God exists as one person who revealed Himself in three modes or forms. In the Old Testament, God revealed himself as the Father. When Jesus was on earth, the revelation was as the Son. Now, God is in the mode of the Holy Spirit. Basically, oneness teaches three consecutive modes of God: the Father who became the Son who became the Holy Spirit. There are variations on this model within Oneness churches, but I will focus on this model here.

However, in the Old Testament, there are numerous places where God is seen. In some places this is the angel of the Lord. In others, it is a vision or a dream. But, there are instances in the Old Testament where God is seen, and it is not an angel, a vision, or a dream. Of course, this can raise some warning flags for Trinitarians as well as Oneness people. But when you look at the totality of Scripture, you'll find that the Trinitarians have an easy answer where the Oneness Pentecostal people do not.

Basically, in those places where God was seen in the Old Testament, it was the person of Jesus; that is, it was the pre-incarnate Word that was seen. It was not the person of the Father that appeared in the OT because Jesus said that no one has ever seen the Father (John 6:46). Yet, God Almighty was seen (Exo. 6:2-3). For the Oneness people, this is a problem since God was in the mode of the Father in the Old Testament; and to them, it had to be the Father.

  • John 6:46, "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father."
  • Exo. 6:2-3, "And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: 3And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them."
  • Num. 12:6-8, "And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. 7My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. 8With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?"
  • See also, Exo. 24:9-11; Gen. 17:1; 18:1; 19:24 with Amos 4:10-11; Acts 7:2.
As you can see from the above scriptures, God Almighty was seen; but it was not God the Father. How then can Oneness theology be correct if God was in the mode of the Father in the Old Testament, that God was seen, and yet Jesus said the Father was not seen? The only answer the Oneness people can give is that God appeared as an angel or in a vision or dream. But if that is so, then is an angel God Almighty? Look at Exo. 6:2-3. God identifies Himself as Jehovah (His self-given name) and states He appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty. Was that an angel? Was it an angel who said, "I am God Almighty"? No. It was God Almighty. Or look at Num. 12:6-8 where God Himself declares that He does not appear to Moses in a vision or a dream, but that Moses beholds His very form. This negates the possibility, at least in this scriptural occurrence, that God appeared to Moses in a vision or dream.

God was seen in the Old Testament, but it was not the Father. It was the Son, the pre-incarnate Christ. Therefore, the Son existed at the same time as the Father in the Old Testament, and Oneness theology is shown to be incorrect because we have both the Father and Son existing at the same time.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
So the story I was told about King Ahaz having two enemy Kings and how they both die didn't happen? And since this virgin born child is The Bab, then this verse has nothing to do about Jesus?
The land of two Kings you dread, could be an allusion to the land of Persia.

Look at Daniel 8:20

"The ram which thou sawest having [two] horns [are] the kings of Media and Persia"


This is the land, the Bab was manifested.

Abdulbaha wrote, Emmanuel is the reality of the Bab. So, this is the Bahai view officially.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
How did my source misrepresent the Bahai faith? What don't I understand about the Bahai faith?

Okay. With respect to your question I shall try to respond. The Bahai's can correct me.

1. Bahai's do not say that Bahaullah is a greater manifestation than Moses, Muhammed and the "Christian Messiah".
2. Their theology can be called "supersessionism". Your source Sky has misunderstood that.
3. He also says that in the "Mother Religion" of Islam, Muhammed is superior and so on. Well, according to the Quran all the prophets are the same and humans are not supposed to make any distinction. He has not understood deeply.
4. In the Bahai faith the Mother religion is not Islam. Islam is just one. Each was a "Thawzeeu". A dispensation.
5. About Jesus's virgin birth matter there is nothing concrete but it seems like Abdul Baha stating Jesus was conceived of the "Spirit" of the God without making him a biological son of Mary's husband alludes to the virgin birth, though indirectly.
6. Zoroaster was monotheistic, not a polytheist. Your source probably thought that Angra Myanhu is another God that many have thought but its not true. This dualism has to be understood.
7. The Hindu scripture says "Na thasya prathima Asthi", and "Ikkam Ividithjam" thus your source saying Krishna was a polytheist has not understood the idea deeply.

Im sorry mate. Such a small and tiny piece of work you had cited here but it has some grave errors. And please correct me if I got anything wrong.

Peace.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
But if you want other people to misunderstand a faith so they will end up believing Christianity is superior, then you misrepresent that faith the way many Christian websites do, and you do it sneakily, hoping that nobody will notice.

On the other hand, a website that is entitled What's Wrong with Baha'i? is a dead giveaway. :rolleyes:

On the other hand, I cannot know anyone's motives, and it is more likely that most Christians who misrepresent the Baha'i Faith do it out of ignorance, because they really do not understand what the Baha'i Faith teaches.

I am not saying this Hank Hanegraaff person misrepresented the faith on purpose. It is probably out of ignorance. But as an explorer I am pretty lame if that is my source of information. Its like getting information about Mary from Rambam. No disrespect meant but that's not a good approach.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The only logical conclusion we can come to is that the Old Testament is a collection of fictional stories about things God did.

The Old Testament predicted the coming of Jesus. Abraham and Moses saw Jesus. Jesus is the Angel of the Lord talked about in Genesis and Exodus and he appeared to the parents of Samson. Daniel saw a spiritual being who was like a Son of God.
Did the OT prophesy Jesus coming from Nazareth? | CARM.org

Did the OT prophesy Jesus coming from Nazareth?
"...and being warned by God in a dream, he [Joseph] departed for the regions of Galilee, and came and resided in a city called Nazareth, that what was spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, 'He shall be called a Nazarene,'" (Matt. 2:22,23).

The question is, "Where is Nazareth spoken of in the Old Testament that states that Jesus would be called a Nazarene?"

There is no direct Old Testament citation that prophesies the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. In fact, Nazareth (approx 1800 people at the time of Christ) is not mentioned anywhere in the Old Testament or in the apocrypha. But, we have two possible explanations:

First, Matthew does not say 'prophet,' singular. He says 'prophets,' plural. It could be that Matthew was referring to several Old Testament references to the despised character of Jesus (i.e., Psalm 22:6, 13; 69:10; Isaiah 49:7; 53:3; Micah 5:1). Nazareth held the Roman garrison for the northern areas of Galilee.1 Therefore, the Jews would have little to do with this place and largely despised it. Perhaps this is why it says in John 1:46, "And Nathanael said to him, 'Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?' Philip said to him, 'Come and see.'" So, it could be a reference not to an actual location, but the maligned character of the Messiah even as Nazareth was maligned for housing the Roman garrison, and Matthew was using it in reference to the implied hatred of Christ.

Second, there could be a play on words that Matthew was referring to. In Isaiah 11:1 it says, "Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit." In Hebrew, the word for "branch" is netzer, "NZR" which letters are included in NaZaReth. It seems that Matthew was referring to the branch, the Nazarene, in turn a reference to God's raising up of the Messiah. Clearly, Matthew was not exegeting Isaiah, but it seems he was referring to the Branch.2



More on Nazareth housing a Roman Garrison. This information is taken from the article found at : "is this where Jesus Bates?" "A shopkeeper running a small souvenir business in Nazareth has made a sensational discovery that could dramatically rewrite the history of Christianity. Jonathan Cook reports, dated October 21, 2003. (Also, http://www.uhl.ac/NazarethVillage/nazareth.html)

  • "...archaeologists and biblical scholars have been poring over a network of tunnels Shama unearthed under his [Elias Shama's store in Nazareth] shop several years ago.
  • "The American excavators are convinced that what Shama has exposed is an almost perfectly preserved Roman bathhouse from 2,000 years ago - the time of Christ, and in the town where he was raised."
  • "The giant bath could only have been built for a Roman city or to service a significant garrison town"
  • "Either way, we know that under the shop lies a huge new piece of evidence in understanding the life and times of Jesus."
  • "Freund, of the Maurice Greenberg Centre for Judaic Studies at Hartford University in Connecticut, says the discovery means that historians will have to rethink the place and significance of Nazareth in the Roman empire and consequently the formative experiences of Jesus. It has been assumed that the Nazareth of 2,000 years ago was a poor Jewish village on the periphery of the empire, where local families inhabited caves on the hillside that today contains the modern Israeli-Arab city. On this view, the young Jesus would have had little contact with the Romans until he left Nazareth as an adult; his father, Joseph, one of many craftsmen in the town, may have worked on a Roman palace at nearby Sephori.
  • But the huge scale of Shama's bathhouse suggests that Nazareth, rather than Sephori, was the local hub of military control from Rome. The giant bath could only have been built for a Roman city or to service a significant garrison town."
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Simply put, because Manifestations of God are human as well as divine. Also, we know Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of Man, and Baha'u'llah also referred to Jesus as the Son of Man in these passages: Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86.

All Manifestations of God have a twofold nature that no other humans possess. They have a human station and a spiritual station:

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself. To this testifieth the tradition: “Manifold and mysterious is My relationship with God. I am He, Himself, 67 and He is I, Myself, except that I am that I am, and He is that He is.” And in like manner, the words: “Arise, O Muḥammad, for lo, the Lover and the Beloved are joined together and made one in Thee.” He similarly saith: “There is no distinction whatsoever between Thee and Them, except that They are Thy Servants.” The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

Of course, its the same answer Christians give regarding Jesus. Thats fine.

But there is no indication in the Tanakh whatsoever that anyone of the prophets, called son of man or not were evert manifestations of God. The phrase used in the Bible directly makes it clear that its a human being. Only much later, Christians interpreted it as a divine calling, but not the Jews. Its an evolved understanding, not a valid understanding according to scripture. The prophet, the Son of Man is "a worm". He is just a man. That is why he is called "son of man". Same as the Quran stating "bani adama", as in Hebrew "Ben Adam" and in Aramaic "Bar Nashaa".
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I agree with you. So why do Baha'is support the belief in the virgin birth of Jesus?

Yeah, what about those?

Of course. The old, if we can't explain it or don't like what it is saying, it must be symbolic. But if we have a spirit and a body why can't God and his angels? Does any other religion have a problem with spirit beings materializing? If not, then why, all of a sudden, do the Baha'is?
Jesus appeared to Abraham in the book of Genesis.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Baha’is believe that Isaiah 53 is about Baha’u’llah, the return of the Christ Spirit that Jesus promised to send (John 14:16, John 14:26, John 15:26, John 16:17). Baha’u’llah was also the Messiah the Jews have been long awaiting.There in the valley of ‘Akká, in sight of holy ‘Carmel’, the entire prophecy of the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was brought to its fulfillment.

Regarding Isaiah 53:3, Jesus was despised and rejected by certain Jews who wanted Him executed, but He was not rejected by most men. Jesus was a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief, but He was esteemed by many men.

Certainly, Isaiah 53:4 and Isaiah 53:5 could apply to Jesus, but they also apply to Baha’u’llah. However, Isaiah 53:8, Isaiah 53:9, and Isaiah 53:10 cannot apply to Jesus because Jesus was not taken from prison and from judgment, Jesus did not make His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death. Jesus made his soul an offering for sin, but He did not see his seed and His days were not prolonged, so there is no way Isaiah 53:10 can be about Jesus, and that is why we know it is about someone else who would be the Messiah of the end days.

Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Bahá’u’lláh was rejected by his own countrymen, and was sent into exile. His life was filled with grief and sorrow.

The Emperor Franz Joseph passed within but a short distance of the prison in which Bahá’u’lláh was captive. Louis Napoleon cast behind his back the letter which Bahá’u’lláh sent to him, saying: “If this man is of God, then I am two Gods!” The people of the world have followed in their footsteps.

Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

I read the following words of Bahá’u’lláh concerning his persecution and imprisonment: “Though weariness lay Me low, and hunger consume Me, and the bare rock be My bed, and My fellows the beasts of the field, I will not complain, but will endure patiently … and will render thanks unto God under all conditions … We pray that, out of His bounty—exalted be He—He may release, through this imprisonment, the necks of men from chains and fetters…” The Promised Day is Come, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 42–3.

Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Bahá’u’lláh was twice stoned, once scourged, thrice poisoned, scarred with hundred-pound chains which cut through his flesh and rested upon the bones of his shoulders. He lived a prisoner and an exile for nearly half a century.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Bahá’u’lláh was taken from the black-pit prison in Tihrán for judgement before the authorities. His death was expected hourly, but he was banished to ‘Iráq and finally to Israel. In the prison-city of ‘Akká, on another occasion, “… the Governor, at the head of his troops, with drawn swords, surrounded (Bahá’u’lláh’s) house. The entire populace, as well as the military authorities, were in a state of great agitation. The shouts and clamour of the people could be heard on all sides. Bahá’u’lláh was peremptorily summoned to the Governorate, interrogated, kept in custody the first night … The Governor, soon after, sent word that he was at liberty to return to his home, and apologized for what had occurred.” God Passes By, Shoghi Effendi, pp. 190–191.

Isaiah 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

Bahá’u’lláh was buried in the precincts of the Mansion of Bahjí, owned by a wealthy Muslim. He was surrounded by enemies; members of his own family who betrayed his trust after his death and dwelt in homes adjacent to his burial-place.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Bahá’u’lláh did see his ‘seed’. He wrote a special document called the Book of the Covenant, in which he appointed his eldest son to be the Centre of his Faith after his own passing. This very event was also foretold in the prophecies of the Psalms that proclaim:“Also I will make him my first-born higher than the kings of the earth … and my covenant shall stand fast with him.” Psalms 89:27, 28

The ‘first-born’ son of Bahá’u’lláh, was named ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, which means ‘the servant of Bahá’(‘u’lláh). Bahá’u’lláh appointed him as his own successor in his Will and Testament. He called ‘Abdu’l-Baháthe Centre of his Covenant.

Bahá’u’lláh’s days were prolonged. He was born in 1817 and passed away in the Holy Land in 1892. In the last years of his life, Bahá’u’lláh was released from his prison cell. He came out of the prison-city of ‘Akká and walked on the sides of Mount Carmel. His followers came from afar to be with him, and to surround him with their love, fulfilling the words of the prayer of David spoken within a cave: “Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise thy name: the righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me.” Psalms 142:7.

These events in the valley of ‘Akká with its strong fortress prison had been foreshadowed in Ecclesiastes 4:14: “For out of prison he cometh to reign; whereas also he that is born in his kingdom becometh poor.”

Comments from: Thief in the Night, pp. 155-159

Thank you for that.

And Isaiah 9? Does that also quote or prophecy Bahaullah? What did they say about Isaiah 9?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Of course, its the same answer Christians give regarding Jesus. Thats fine.

But there is no indication in the Tanakh whatsoever that anyone of the prophets, called son of man or not were evert manifestations of God. The phrase used in the Bible directly makes it clear that its a human being. Only much later, Christians interpreted it as a divine calling, but not the Jews. Its an evolved understanding, not a valid understanding according to scripture. The prophet, the Son of Man is "a worm". He is just a man. That is why he is called "son of man". Same as the Quran stating "bani adama", as in Hebrew "Ben Adam" and in Aramaic "Bar Nashaa".

Jesus being both God and Man is called the hypostatic union. Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. Jesus' Two Natures: God and Man | CARM.org

Jesus' Two Natures: God and Man
Jesus is the most important person who has ever lived since he is the Savior, God in human flesh. He is not half God and half man. He is fully divine and fully man. In other words, Jesus has two distinct natures: divine and human. Jesus is the Word who was God and was with God and was made flesh (John 1:1, 14). This means that in the single person of Jesus he has both a human and divine nature, God and man. The divine nature was not changed when the Word became flesh (John 1:1, 14). Instead, the Word was joined with humanity (Col. 2:9). Jesus' divine nature was not altered. Also, Jesus is not merely a man who "had God within Him," nor is he a man who "manifested the God principle." He is God in flesh, second person of the Trinity. "The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word." (Heb. 1:3). Jesus' two natures are not "mixed together" (Eutychianism), nor are they combined into a new God-man nature (Monophysitism). They are separate yet act as a unit in the one person of Jesus. This is called the Hypostatic Union.

The following chart should help you see the two natures of Jesus "in action":

GOD MAN
He is worshiped (Matt. 2:2, 11; 14:33) He worshiped the Father (John 17)
He was called God (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8) He was called man (Mark 15:39; John 19:5)
He was called Son of God (Mark 1:1) He was called Son of Man (John 9:35-37)
He is prayed to (Acts 7:59) He prayed to the Father (John 17)
He is sinless (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15) He was tempted (Matt. 4:1)
He knows all things (John 21:17) He grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52)
He gives eternal life (John 10:28) He died (Rom. 5:8)
All the fullness of deity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9)
He has a body of flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)

The Communicatio Idiomatum
A doctrine that is related to the Hypostatic Union is the communicatio idiomatum (Latin for "communication of properties"). This is the teaching that the attributes of both the divine and human natures are ascribed to the one person of Jesus. This means that the man Jesus could lay claim to the glory He had with the Father before the world was made (John 17:5), claim that He descended from heaven (John 3:13), and also claim omnipresence (Matt. 28:20). All of these are divine qualities that are laid claim to by Jesus; therefore, the attributes of the divine properties were claimed by the person of Jesus.

One of the most common errors that non-Christian cults make is not understanding the two natures of Christ. For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses focus on Jesus' humanity and ignore His divinity. They repeatedly quote verses dealing with Jesus as a man and try to set them against Scripture showing that Jesus is also divine. On the other hand, the Christian Scientists do the reverse. They focus on the Scriptures showing Jesus' divinity to the extent of denying His true humanity.

For a proper understanding of Jesus and, therefore, all other doctrines that relate to Him, His two natures must be properly understood and defined. Jesus is one person with two natures. This is why He would grow in wisdom and stature (Luke 2:52) and yet know all things (John 21:17). He is the Divine Word that became flesh (John 1:1, 14).

The Bible is about Jesus (John 5:39). The prophets prophesied about Him (Acts 10:43). The Father bore witness of Him (John 5:37; 8:18). The Holy Spirit bore witness of Him (John 15:26). The works Jesus did bore witness of Him (John 5:36; 10:25). The multitudes bore witness of Him (John 12:17). And, Jesus bore witness of Himself (John 14:6; 18:6).

Other verses to consider when examining His deity are John 10:30-33; 20:28; Col. 2:9; Phil. 2:5-8; Heb. 1:6-8; and 2 Pet. 1:1.

1 Tim. 2:5 says, "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Right now, there is a man in heaven on the throne of God. He is our advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1). He is our Savior (Titus 2:13). He is our Lord (Rom. 10:9-10). He is Jesus.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Emmanuel means God with us.
Again: your point?

I have no issue with the idea that Matthew 1:23 is a reference to the Tanakh. I have no issue with the idea that the Gospel authors were familiar with the Tanakh.

... but none of this says anything about the intent of the authors of the Tanakh.

Do you understand what I'm saying to you? Your posts suggest that you don't.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Genesis 18 is symbolic. Bible clearly says, God is an invisible spirit.

God being an invisible spirit doesn't mean that He couldn't have come down as a person. God cannot die. Jesus died. Therefore, Jesus cannot be God. | CARM.org

God cannot die. Jesus died. Therefore, Jesus cannot be God.
by Matt Slick

One of the doctrines that many people fail to understand concerning Jesus is the doctrine of the hypostatic union. This is in the teaching that Jesus has two natures: God and man. In other words, Jesus is both God and man at the same time. This is why we see some scriptures that point to Him being divine and others pointing to His being a man. Below is a chart illustrating the two natures of Jesus as derived from scripture.

Jesus is one person with two natures
GOD MAN
He is worshiped (Matt. 2:2, 11; 14:33; 28:9)
He is prayed to (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 1:1-2)
He was called God (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8)
He was called Son of God (Mark 1:1)
He is sinless (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15)
He knew all things (John 21:17)
He gives eternal life (John 10:28; 17:2)
The fullness of deity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9)

He worshiped the Father (John 17)
He prayed to the Father (John 17:1)
He was called man (Mark 15:39; John 19:5).
He was called Son of Man (John 9:35-37)
He was tempted (Matt. 4:1)
He grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52)
He died (Rom. 5:8)
He has a body of flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)

This is not a made-up doctrine. Rather, it is a doctrine derived from observing God's word. It is true that God cannot die. It is also true that man can die. But we see that Jesus has two natures, not one. It was the human part of Jesus that died on the cross, not the divine. But, because He is both God and man in one person and because He was sinless, His sacrifice is sufficient to cover the sins of the world.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
That doesn't have anything to do with God coming down as a person to save us and to teach us how to live and to reconcile us back to a relationship with God. How can Jesus be both God and the Son of God? | CARM.org
"Jesus can be both God and the son of God because the terms don't mean the same thing. When we say that Jesus is God (John 1:1, 14; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:8), we are saying that Jesus possesses the divine nature (as well as a human nature, see hypostatic union)."
That is what Baha'is believe. Jesus possesses the divine nature as well as a human nature. That means He is kind of like a God-man, neither God nor man.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself. To this testifieth the tradition: “Manifold and mysterious is My relationship with God. I am He, Himself, and He is I, Myself, except that I am that I am, and He is that He is.” …. The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

"Likewise, if the term "Son of Man" means that Jesus is a man, then does it not imply that when it says Jesus is the "Son of God" that he is God? the term "Son of God" does not mean that Jesus is not God. Think about it. If the term "Son of God" meant that Jesus is not God, then does the term "Son of Man" mean that Jesus is not a man? Of course not."
It means that Jesus is the Son of God so He has both a human nature and a divine nature, but having a divine nature does not make Jesus into God. Jesus is not God and Jesus is not a man, Jesus is part man and part God, a God-man.
 
Top