How can the Jew reject, Jesus, Muhammad, Bab and Baha'u'llah?

[Trailblazer]

The glorified body is related to the redemption of the body. The Redemption of Our Body

I consider that a complete misinterpretation of scriptures.... I have it saved in a Word document, so one more time:

A glorified body is not physical, it is spiritual. There is nothing in the Bible that supports such a belief. There is no such thing as a physical body, that differs from our fallen mortal bodies in that it will never age, suffer disease, or die. It is not in the Bible, it is a misinterpretation of scripture. Below is a post I posted to another Christian a few months ago:

There is no such thing as a glorious spiritual body of incorruptible light. This is not in the Bible anywhere.

There is no such thing as a physical body that is transformed into an immortal body. It is not in the Bible anywhere. This is a Christian belief that came about because the Bible was misinterpreted. ALL these misconceptions about a Resurrection Body came about because Christians believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

It is clear and plain what the Bible SAYS.

There are physical bodies and spiritual bodies, as Paul said. The physical body is the source of all corruption as the Bible says, it is the source of dishonor, it is weak, and that is because the physical body is subject to sin.

The spiritual body is incorruptible because spirit can never die. Paul said that the body is raised in glory and raised in power and that is because the spiritual body has glory and power. The soul (spirit) is glorified and has power because it was created by God.
Baha’is believe that souls go to heaven and take on a spiritual body, which is the same thing as what Paul says in 1st Cor:
We are raised in a spiritual body because only spiritual bodies can enter heaven.

1st Corinthians 15

35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

The verse above says nothing about the physical body being changed into a glorified body that cannot die. The verses above clearly state that there are two kinds of bodies, a natural body and a spiritual body; we are sown in a natural body and we are raised in a spiritual body.

 

[Skywalker]

It means Jesus will not be in the world anymore, so there can be no second coming of Jesus.

The context of Jesus saying that was before he went to the cross, not in a discussion about the second coming.

 

[Skywalker]

I consider that a complete misinterpretation of scriptures.... I have it saved in a Word document, so one more time:

A glorified body is not physical, it is spiritual. There is nothing in the Bible that supports such a belief. There is no such thing as a physical body, that differs from our fallen mortal bodies in that it will never age, suffer disease, or die. It is not in the Bible, it is a misinterpretation of scripture. Below is a post I posted to another Christian a few months ago:

There is no such thing as a glorious spiritual body of incorruptible light. This is not in the Bible anywhere.

There is no such thing as a physical body that is transformed into an immortal body. It is not in the Bible anywhere. This is a Christian belief that came about because the Bible was misinterpreted. ALL these misconceptions about a Resurrection Body came about because Christians believe that Jesus rose from the dead.

It is clear and plain what the Bible SAYS.

There are physical bodies and spiritual bodies, as Paul said. The physical body is the source of all corruption as the Bible says, it is the source of dishonor, it is weak, and that is because the physical body is subject to sin.

The spiritual body is incorruptible because spirit can never die. Paul said that the body is raised in glory and raised in power and that is because the spiritual body has glory and power. The soul (spirit) is glorified and has power because it was created by God.
Baha’is believe that souls go to heaven and take on a spiritual body, which is the same thing as what Paul says in 1st Cor:
We are raised in a spiritual body because only spiritual bodies can enter heaven.

1st Corinthians 15

35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

The verse above says nothing about the physical body being changed into a glorified body that cannot die. The verses above clearly state that there are two kinds of bodies, a natural body and a spiritual body; we are sown in a natural body and we are raised in a spiritual body.

Aging, suffering, disease, and dying exists because of the fall. Before the tribulation, the souls of people will be brought up and they will become glorified bodies. I think people at the judgement seat of Christ and the marriage supper of the lamb will have different bodies. Why do you think Christians won't return in glorified bodies?

The Redemption of Our Body

1. [*]Just as God removed Noah and his family before the judgment of the flood came upon the world, so will He remove every believer (i.e., THE CHURCH) from the world before the judgment of the Tribulation. Likewise, God had to remove Lot and his family before He would bring judgment upon the wicked city of Sodom.
   
   
   
   [*]The events of The Judgment Seat of Christ (2nd Corinthians 5:10) and The Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Revelation 19:9) will take place in Heaven during the 7-year Tribulation Period of earth.
   
   
   
   [*]According to Daniel 9:25-27 (also see Matthew 24:15; Revelation 11:3, 12:6) the Antichrist will proclaim himself to be god from the temple in Jerusalem, demanding worship from the Jews. This event in Matthew 24:15 is called THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION. From this event, there will be exactly 3 1/2 years remaining to the Tribulation Period until the Second Coming of our Lord. Hence, if the Rapture comes AFTER the Tribulation, then Christians WILL know exactly when the Lord is going to return (3 1/2 years after the Antichrist claims to be god from the temple in Jerusalem). This would totally contradict the Words of our Lord in Mark 13:32, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." No one knows when the Lord will return. Thus, the Bible plainly teaches a Pretribulation Rapture. Even so come Lord Jesus.

 

[CG Didymus]

We don't have to move any mountains to make Mount Carmel into the place where the glory of the Lord appeared in the last days.

Isaiah prophesied that the Plain of Sharon and the holy mountain, Carmel, would both be centres for the light and presence of the ‘Glory of the Lord’ in the last days. He said:

“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.” (Isaiah 35:1).

“It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God.” (Isaiah 35:2).

“And the ransomed of the LORD shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.” (Isaiah 35:10).

Again in the chapter preceding the one in which he, Isaiah, promises that God will raise up a ‘righteous man from the East’, he foretells:

“And the Glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of God hath spoken it.” (Isaiah 40:5).

"In that same year (1890) Bahá’u’lláh’s tent, the “Tabernacle of Glory,” was raised on Mt. Carmel, “the Hill of God and His Vineyard,” the home of Elijah, extolled by Isaiah as the “mountain of the Lord,” to which “all nations shall flow.” Four times He visited Haifa, His last visit being no less than three months long. In the course of one of these visits, when His tent was pitched in the vicinity of the Carmelite Monastery, He, the “Lord of the Vineyard,” revealed the Tablet of Carmel, remarkable for its allusions and prophecies. On another occasion He pointed out Himself to ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, as He stood on the slopes of that mountain, the site which was to serve as the permanent resting-place of the Báb, and on which a befitting mausoleum was later to be erected." (God Passes By, p. 194)

From: William Sears, Thief in the Night

Okay, so the verses that mention Mt. Carmel, those are literal. And those that mention Mt. Zion and Jerusalem, those are metaphorical?

 

[CG Didymus]

Now you sound like a Christian, but the problem is that there is only one true God, the God who revealed all the religions, and Jews and Christians don't "own" that God.

You have to do some creative interpretations to make the "God" of all religions the same. Then I know you try and eliminate some religions by saying they weren't "revealed". So God, for the people of India, told them that he is more than one and that he incarnates now and again. He also told most of them not to eat meat. Then he told the Hebrews not only to keep eating meat but to sacrifice some of their meat to him. Then he told Christians not to sacrifice animals. And so on.

All I've ever heard Baha'is say is that these inconsistencies are because people have added things into their religion. That if we go to the "original" message, we'd find a consistent message. But there is no "original" message. All we have is Baha'is telling us that "originally" all revealed religions are one and a progression from one to the next. And, that the new one abrogates the "social" teaching of the previous one. So all "true" seekers... All those that love God, should have dumped their old beliefs and followed the latest person who claimed to have a message from God. So, prior to the Baha'i Faith, every true lover of God should have become a follower of Muhammad's teachings?

But you know that didn't happen. And really, why back when, a spiritual Jew should have left their religion for the "truth" of the message of the Buddha or Zoroaster? They should have recognized God in the teachings of those religions and adopted those new, updated laws from God? No, we know that all those religions are very different. And the "God" they teach about in their Scriptures is very different in each religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

Okay, so the verses that mention Mt. Carmel, those are literal. And those that mention Mt. Zion and Jerusalem, those are metaphorical?

Read on and that will be answered in another post that I posted to you yesterday:
#884 Trailblazer, Yesterday at 5:43 PM

 

[Skywalker]

You have to do some creative interpretations to make the "God" of all religions the same. Then I know you try and eliminate some religions by saying they weren't "revealed". So God, for the people of India, told them that he is more than one and that he incarnates now and again. He also told most of them not to eat meat. Then he told the Hebrews not only to keep eating meat but to sacrifice some of their meat to him. Then he told Christians not to sacrifice animals. And so on.

All I've ever heard Baha'is say is that these inconsistencies are because people have added things into their religion. That if we go to the "original" message, we'd find a consistent message. But there is no "original" message. All we have is Baha'is telling us that "originally" all revealed religions are one and a progression from one to the next. And, that the new one abrogates the "social" teaching of the previous one. So all "true" seekers... All those that love God, should have dumped their old beliefs and followed the latest person who claimed to have a message from God. So, prior to the Baha'i Faith, every true lover of God should have become a follower of Muhammad's teachings?

But you know that didn't happen. And really, why back when, a spiritual Jew should have left their religion for the "truth" of the message of the Buddha or Zoroaster? They should have recognized God in the teachings of those religions and adopted those new, updated laws from God? No, we know that all those religions are very different. And the "God" they teach about in their Scriptures is very different in each religion.

Early Zoroastrianism didn't have beliefs about the bodily ressurection. There's also evidence that the Persians were influenced by the Jews and the Bible. Jesus Vs Zoroaster – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

Does indeed Persia have anything to do with Jerusalem? Zoroaster’s faith had an idea that sounds like, and probably is, bodily resurrection, though it is most clear only in AD-dated texts. Did the Jews “steal” this idea while under the thumb of the Persians? There is no direct evidence either way; the Persians may have got the ideas from the Jews, and from Ezekiel or Daniel.

 

[CG Didymus]

The question any sincere seeker of truth would who wanted to know the truth about the meaning of the verse would ask is what does Jeremiah mean by "you."

So a person who doesn't research the meaning of the words in the different prophecies isn't a sincere seeker? Yes, I can see that. So what do the words mean when Jesus says he is not a ghost but has flesh and bone?

I cannot say how long this will last until God finally intercedes and makes it clear who the Messiah was. I hope it is soon.

Christians tell me that when Jesus comes it will be very clear... You know like every eye will see him. It says that things will get so bad that people will want to die rather than go through more torment. Has that happened yet? No... but I supposed those verses aren't literal.

 

[CG Didymus]

God decides what is needed, not humans.
God decided that Jesus would lay the foundation for the Kingdom of God on earth and Baha'u'llah would come along later to finish the job.

There is nothing disorderly about that.

What do you see as the "foundation" that Jesus laid? And what ever you think that might be, do you still think that Paul changed it?

 

[CG Didymus]

Early Zoroastrianism didn't have beliefs about the bodily ressurection. There's also evidence that the Persians were influenced by the Jews and the Bible. Jesus Vs Zoroaster – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

To follow the Baha'i progression, people should have come to believe in Zoroastrianism. So Jews missed the Buddha, Zoroaster, Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and now Baha'u'llah. Their religion and their laws, according to the Baha'is, were abrogated with the new messenger/manifestation from God.

 

[CG Didymus]

Ignored: preaching

Did the Baha'is ever really want to know why a Jew would reject Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah? Or was it just so they could have an opportunity to say (they don't "preach" or "proselytize") why a Jew and all people should believe in them?

 

[Skywalker]

To follow the Baha'i progression, people should have come to believe in Zoroastrianism. So Jews missed the Buddha, Zoroaster, Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and now Baha'u'llah. Their religion and their laws, according to the Baha'is, were abrogated with the new messenger/manifestation from God.

Many parallels between Zoroastrianism and Judaism and Christianity are exagarated. Satan is not depicted as a God in the book of Job either in the Christian or Jewish interpretation. Claims of the Old Testament borrowing from Persian religions are questionable. Jesus Vs Zoroaster – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

We’ll see some other general ideas they have in common as well. But in terms of borrowing, no evidence exists — one way or the other, and a determination depends on the interpretations and datings of Zoroastrian texts. Zoroastrian scholars offer no consensus on the subject [Yam.PB, 461]: Yamauchi cites one scholar who believes that the Jews borrowed, another that says there is no way to tell who borrowed, and yet another who says that the borrowing was the other way. There is also a great difference in approach: The Jews buried their dead, while the Zoros exposed their dead.

Others argue that the Jewish idea of Satan is borrowed from Zoroastrianism. But Satan appears in Job, a very early book, and is nothing like the evil god Ahriman, who is a dualistic equal to Ohrmazd the good god, rather than a subordinate. Finally, it is significant that while the OT used plenty of Persian loanwords for governmental matters, they did not use any for religion [Yam.PB, 463]. The most we find is, I am told, the name of a Persian demon in the Book of Tobit!

 

[Trailblazer]

You have to do some creative interpretations to make the "God" of all religions the same. Then I know you try and eliminate some religions by saying they weren't "revealed". So God, for the people of India, told them that he is more than one and that he incarnates now and again. He also told most of them not to eat meat. Then he told the Hebrews not only to keep eating meat but to sacrifice some of their meat to him. Then he told Christians not to sacrifice animals. And so on.

This is really not all that difficult, but we have covered this ground before. God reveals religions through Messengers but there are two problems: First, regarding the older religions there were never any original scriptures so we cannot know exactly what those Messengers said. Second, the religious followers misinterpret those scriptures, partly because they did not understand them and also because there was never an appointed interpreter of those scriptures. Of course these are no longer a problem because we now have the original scriptures that Baha'u'llah wrote, and we have appointed interpreters of those scriptures.

All I've ever heard Baha'is say is that these inconsistencies are because people have added things into their religion. That if we go to the "original" message, we'd find a consistent message. But there is no "original" message.

That's right, as I just said above. The fact that there is no original message written by the Messenger means that we cannot know exactly what that Messenger said, so we have to go with the scriptures we have and trust them, although we should realize they are not word-for-word what the Messenger said. When I say they added things to the religion I mean that they interpreted the scriptures and they made assumptions that are not supported by the actual verses. I am finding that to be the case more and more, the more I converse with Jews and Christians. They make assumptions as to what verses mean when they really don;t know.

All we have is Baha'is telling us that "originally" all revealed religions are one and a progression from one to the next.

No, progressive revelation is not that simple, and Baha'is do not say that one religion leads to the next in chronological order. Rather . it means humanity is 'progressing', evolving spiritually, over time. If you still do not understand progressive revelation, I suggest you read this book, which is online free to read: The Heart of the Gospel

And, that the new one abrogates the "social" teaching of the previous one. So all "true" seekers... All those that love God, should have dumped their old beliefs and followed the latest person who claimed to have a message from God. So, prior to the Baha'i Faith, every true lover of God should have become a follower of Muhammad's teachings?

Yes it is true that the new dispensation abrogates the previous dispensation, but no religion can ever be abrogated, since all revealed religions came from God, so they were all valid for the ages in which they were revealed. Here is the caveat: Prior to the Baha'i Faith, the followers of the older religions had not been told about progressive revelation, thus they did not know about it; so those religious believers were not responsible to recognize the Messenger that came after their Messenger, and the religion that was established in His name.

And even today, if a Jew or Christian or any other religion never heard of the Baha'i Faith, then how would they know what Baha'u'llah taught about their duty to recognize all the Messengers, since they all came from the one true God? But once they know about the Baha'i Faith and the message of Baha'u'llah they are accountable to God to recognize all the Messengers and religions they established, not only their own religion. Baha'is are charged with telling them and then the ball is in their court.

But you know that didn't happen. And really, why back when, a spiritual Jew should have left their religion for the "truth" of the message of the Buddha or Zoroaster? They should have recognized God in the teachings of those religions and adopted those new, updated laws from God? No, we know that all those religions are very different. And the "God" they teach about in their Scriptures is very different in each religion.

You raise a good point, and as I just explained above, before Baha'u'llah came and explained that all religions are one and they all came from the one true God, there was no way the religious believers could have known that. I will now add that God ever intended for the religious believers living in the past to adhere to any religion other than their own, because it would me unjust for God to expect that of them. After all, their scriptures do say that they are the only true religion, such as when Jesus says He is the Only Way to the Father. So, before Baha'u'llah came there was a reason for them to believe Jesus meant that He was the Only Way for all time, but now there is no reason to KEEP believing that, and no excuse if they have heard of the Bahai Faith, because Baha'u'llah explained that no religion is the Only Way for all time, that time marches on and God sends a new Messenger to suit the needs of the present age.

 

[Trailblazer]

To follow the Baha'i progression, people should have come to believe in Zoroastrianism. So Jews missed the Buddha, Zoroaster, Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and now Baha'u'llah. Their religion and their laws, according to the Baha'is, were abrogated with the new messenger/manifestation from God.

No, as I just explained to you in my previous post, religious people living back in the days before Baha'u'llah came were not obligated to recognize any religion or any Messengers other than the one they believed in, which was usually the religion that was passed down to them through the previous generation.

Only now that we have been told about progressive revelation are religious believers obligated to accept all the religions that were revealed by the one true God. But the problem is that even when they are told that there is only one true God who revealed all the religions, most people STILL reject that teaching and cling to their older religion.

 

[dybmh]

Point of clarification: we didn't have infallible "Messengers" when the Torah was given. They were considered prophets, but were not considered God-like or infallible. This idea of flawless human "Messengers" was invented with Christ, and was expanded by Islam.

But if people are not deified, then there is no need for new "Messengers". Simple human intellectual and moral progress is all that's needed.

 

[dybmh]

But the problem is that even when they are told that there is only one true God who revealed all the religions, most people STILL reject that teaching and cling to their older religion.

It's not a problem for Jewish people. Maybe the problem is just in your imagination.

 

[Trailblazer]

Did the Baha'is ever really want to know why a Jew would reject Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah? Or was it just so they could have an opportunity to say (they don't "preach" or "proselytize") why a Jew and all people should believe in them?

That is totally unfair and unjust. I would be very happy to have a Jew explain to me why they reject Jesus, Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah. So far, all a Jew has ever said is that it because Jesus and Baha'u'llah did not fulfill the Messianic prophecies, but that is not a fact, it is a personal opinion, and as such it is debatable. And what about Muhammad, why do Jews reject Muhammad? He never claimed to be the Messiah so that cannot be the reason.

But apparently Jews do not want to discuss or debate about the Bahai Faith. It seems to me that as soon as they see they cannot win the debate, they bail out. It is that time that they normally either ignore my posts or they start casting aspersions. This is totally predictable behavior and I experienced the same thing on Delphi Forums for the five years I was there before I came to this forum.

At least Christians are willing to engage in and honest conversation, but that has never been the case with any Jews. Christians try to defend their turf whereas Jews just cast aspersions or walk away, so what am I to think?

i just report what I have experienced and I never lie. The evidence that I tried to engage with a Jewish person in an honest dialogue -- after I was engaged by him, not before -- is all on is thread, and then I got accused of preaching just because I was explaining my beliefs. That is so unjust.

Except for the fact that you are here, I don't even know why I am still on this thread. Do you see any other Baha'is here? I will also remind you that it was not me who started this thread.

 

[Trailblazer]

So a person who doesn't research the meaning of the words in the different prophecies isn't a sincere seeker? Yes, I can see that.

That is not what I said. I said a sincere seeker would want to know what the verse really means, rather than just assuming or insisting they know what it means.

So what do the words mean when Jesus says he is not a ghost but has flesh and bone?

Jesus never said that. The Gospel authors wrote stories that say that Jesus said that. It's laughable that anyone would believe those words came from Jesus because that is logically impossible..

Christians tell me that when Jesus comes it will be very clear... You know like every eye will see him. It says that things will get so bad that people will want to die rather than go through more torment. Has that happened yet? No... but I supposed those verses aren't literal.

You can believe whatever you want to believe, but Jesus is not coming back to earth. There is absolutely no basis for believing that Jesus is going to return to earth in the same body because it does not say that anywhere in the New Testament. No, those verses are not literal and Christians have completely misinterpreted what the Bible says about the return of Christ.

 

[dybmh]

So far, all a Jew has ever said is that it because Jesus and Baha'u'llah did not fulfill the Messianic prophecies, but that is not a fact, it is a personal opinion, and as such it is debatable. And what about Muhammad, why do Jews reject Muhammad? He never claimed to be the Messiah so that cannot be the reason.

Nonsense: I've explained it.

Denial of Baha'u'llah is because he wrote that Israel is satanic. Post #3

How many Manifestations of Holiness, how many Revealers of the light everlasting, have appeared since the time of Moses, and yet Israel, wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings, is still expectant that the idol of her own handiwork will appear with such signs as she herself hath conceived!

(The Kitáb-i-Íqán)
www.bahai.org/r/570360520
​

Also claiming that any person is God-like and infallible is foolish. No one and nothing is perfect except for God. Attributing this perfection onto the Universal House of Justice is a terrible idea.

Jesus can futher be rejected because no one really knows what Jesus said or did. Going by the story in the Christian bible he was not perfect. There is no reason to believe that he was a flawless messenger of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

What do you see as the "foundation" that Jesus laid? And what ever you think that might be, do you still think that Paul changed it?

No, I do not think that Paul changed the foundation that Jesus laid, all Paul did was to replace much of what Jesus taught with new teachings.

Jesus laid the “foundation” for the future Kingdom of God on earth by spiritualizing humanity, and without the foundation Jesus laid with His teachings the Kingdom would not be possible. Jesus was also the Herald of the Kingdom, the Harbinger who came to announce the coming of the Kingdom.

By Kingdom, I am referring to an actual “physical” Kingdom of God in the material world, a sociopolitical system, a new government and a new society, the Kingdom of God on earth. The Kingdom of God that is within us has to exist within the hearts of man in order to prepare them to build the Kingdom of God on earth.

Isaiah 9:6-7 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

From: Christ and Baha'u'llah

The Kingdom in the Bible . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Jesus Christ, Herald of the Kingdom . . . . . . 20

“Jesus created a power of perceiving God which was new, and in order that it might operate clearly, had to cleanse the spirit of man from all worldly encumbrances. Virtue becomes detachment from the world, sin attachment to it. Jesus demanded this sacrifice — losing the life of the world for the life of the spirit, but He made God so attractive, so joyous, loving, powerful, that the Christian was ready to abandon all for Him, and for Christ Who revealed Him.

Thus the tremendous and fearsome Deity of the Old Testament wins men's hearts in the New. We read of the poor sparrow whose fall was watched by a loving Father, of the flower of the field and the bird of the air, and the tenderest stories that ever have won men's hearts — the prodigal son and the good Samaritan.

A new quality of love now characterizes the Kingdom, a love which united the believers not only with God, but with each other, and even extended to enemies and "them that hate you." "That ye love one another" became the test of Christian discipleship.

The supreme ideal of this love was, as shown in John, the relationship between Christ and the Father, and though revealed in the most simple language and the plainest words, stands as the highest expression of Divine love in scripture.

The result was that Jesus' teachings let loose upon the soul and heart of man a spiritual power such as never had been known in the world before. Historians have said that Jesus' teaching has done more to elevate human nature and civilization than all the laws of legislators and the disquisitions of philosophers combined. By releasing religious energies measured to the needs of the hour and the people, He opened the way to the Kingdom of God in men's hearts. New affections and aspirations, hopes and loyalties were brought into being and the whole moral world was carried into a state of flux.”

Christ and Baha'u'llah, Chapter 4