• 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!

Understanding the holy scriptures is impossible unless God gives you the interpretation

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
When you use a source you should link it. The problem with the article that you plagiarized is that it only is talking about one specific form of atheism. Let's say I thoroughly debunked certain beliefs of the Southern Baptists, just as an example. Does that mean that I debunked all of Christianity? I hope that you said no. And even though this article probably fails in their attack on anti-theism, they have in no way found a valid argument against atheism in general.

And why the article even brought up abiogenesis is beyond me. The fact is that life probably did start on its own. That is not a faith based belief because there is evidence for abiogenesis. There is not enough evidence to raise it to the level of a theory yet.

So far you have failed in an epic manner. Would you care to try again. Here is a helpful hint, it is all but impossible to refute that which you do not understand.

Please be honest and stop making things up and making claims that are not true. You do know that the source of that article you are referring to is linked to in the very first line of the post you are quoting from right? It would not hurt you to apologise when your claims are shown to be in error you know. Anyhow up to you. Maybe you did not read what you were quoting from carefully before responding. I guess at the end of the day you have your faith and I have mine and we will have to agree to disagree :)
 
Last edited:

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
If you grew up in Christendom, then like me, you were not educated in Christianity....you were exposed to the poisonous “weeds” of Jesus’ parable. He said that these were fake Christians sown by the devil.....don’t you believe him? (Matthew 13:36-43)
When I studied the Bible instead of just being fed church doctrine, I saw how far they had strayed from Jesus’ teachings. This is why ‘all roads do not lead to Rome’. Only “few” are on the road to life. (Matthew 7:13-14) This is a very inconvenient truth that Baha’i’s ignore, along with many other teachings of Jesus Christ. I would have more respect if you just disavowed all connection to the teachings of Jesus Christ, instead of pretending that they matter.

Many on this forum have grown up with Christianity and taken the time to question their beliefs. The ones who judge and condemn their fellow Christians are the most problematic in regards what Christ taught (Matthew 7:1-4). They cause division, dissension and schism within the Body of Christ. Of course Christianity now has hundreds if not thousands of sects so the JWs are not the first and last to invent an "I'm right and your wrong version of Christianity".

The verses in Matthew 7:13-14...

"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."


...means to me:

1/ Follow God
2/ Recognise His Prophets and Messengers
3/ Don't reject them
4/ Follow their Teachings.

The very specific meaning during Christ's era was very few recognised Him let alone followed His Teaching.

The core tenants of Christianity are not the trinity, Jesus is NOT "God the Son".....the immaculate conception....Mary was as sinful as any other offspring of Adam.....the idea that Peter was the first Pope as Jesus' successor is simply not true. Peter was given responsibilities but he was not appointed as 'head of the church'. He held no rank over the other apostles. Read your prophets words...these are the things he said were "Christian". None of them are. Were you raised Catholic?

Did you actually read what I wrote? I did not mention the trinity, or "God the Son". Are you deliberately twisting my words?

By immaculate conception is meant Christ was born of the Holy Spirit, not a particular doctrine of the Catholic Church. Mary was an outstanding woman of her day. It was never stated she was perfect.

Jesus clearly appointed Peter as His successor:

And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Matthew 16:16-19

That was clearly understood by the Apostles and led to Peter being considered the first leader of the Christan Church and the scriptural basis for successive leaders to follow. The church was relatively united within the first few centuries though of course there were those who had views that stood in complete contradiction to the spirit and substance of what Christ taught. Of course the Church struggled with unity at times and eventually schism occurred. That is simply history.

Your religion might tolerate a lot of things....the question is...does God tolerate them? We don't tolerate what God doesn't. No immorality, no drunkenness, no dissension, no disturbance of the peace that we all enjoy as a global brotherhood. The first Christians did not tolerate any of that, so neither do we.. If you know the rules and you break them...if you have no intention to alter your course.....there's the door.

There are extreme circumstances where a Baha'i may lose their voting rights, membership or even be considered a Covenant Breaker. We work with behavioural problems constructively and don't pry into peoples personal lives unless they are fragrantly breaking laws. We don't cast people out because they have difference points of view and we don't tear families apart with inhumane disfellowshiping policy. However it is phrased, such an approach isn't even remotely inspired by the Gospels IMHO.

What is the point of trying to be all things to all people if you actually accomplish very little in trying to patch up a dying and irreparable system? That’s like trying to put a band aid on the Titanic.

The Baha'is agree the current system is corrupt and broken and we have a model of a better approach. That's one reason Baha'is don't run for political office. We are not trying to repair the system but creating an example of a better more constructive approach based on God's Word. So while there are dark forces that led to destruction such as materialism, ego, greed, political tribalism, nationalism, racism, religious prejudice, sexism and extreme social and economic injustice, there are also positive forces at work. We see greater levels of constructive cooperation at all leves of society whether local, national or international. Movements that work to promote equality of races and gender and to overcome all forms of discrimination are important. So there are movements that clearly align with Baha'i values that don't involve partisan politics where we can work besides others to make a constructive difference in the world. However as you realise we do need a much better system of government that we have currently.

God’s Kingdom will “come” as Jesus said.....but how? Daniel tells us how....

In Daniel 2:44 he speaks of the days of the present world rulers and says...
“In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever”.

That is exactly the Kingdom the Baha'is are building worldwide as we speak.

We are told that God’s Kingdom will "crush" all worldly kingdoms out of existence and replace them. So what you are trying to fix, God has already condemned. World rulership was handed over to Satan to prove his claims that humans are better off making their own decisions (Luke 4:5-8)....and we all know how that has turned out.

The Baha'i version of God's Kingdom on earth will not be crushing any worldly kingdoms or raising a sword in battle.

You leave God out of the picture entirely...why? Why couldn't there be a worldwide deluge if God caused it and managed the results of it? Never say never where the Creator is concerned. He is the inventor of science you know. He can also manipulate his creation if he wants to. He made the shadows on a stairway go backwards once (2 Kings 20:8-11).....you think that was impossible for him?

So if there was a worldwide flood or deluge several thousand years ago, why is there no scientific evidence that such a flood took place? The problem isn't with science or God. It is with people who make religious claims through misinterpretation of their scriptures. Taking a literal interpretation of the story of Noah in Genesis is one example amongst many.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Indeed. Seems you have made a science out of handwaiving in order to avoid discussion :)
No, you made foolish and ignorant claims and your errors were explained to you. Instead of denying it the honest thing to do would have been to try to learn from your errors. Ask polite questions. It is always the wisest course to take when you are discussing things that you do not understand.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Please be honest and stop making things up and making claims that are not true. You do know that the source of that article you are referring to is linked to in the very first line of the post you are quoting from right? It would not hurt you to apologise when your claims are shown to be in error you know. Anyhow up to you. Maybe you did not read what you were quoting from carefully before responding. I guess at the end of the day you have your faith and I have mine and we will have to agree to disagree :)

You are correct. It was there and I missed it. It was not very obvious there. You see when I do screw up I admit it and apologize. You have screwed up countless times. Did you apologize yet?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
We have many different eye witness accounts through the biblical records in regards to JESUS which also bare record to other historical figures around in his lifetime (e.g. Herod, Pontius Pilot, Emperor Tiberius and Jewish historical records outside of the bible and others) some of which are recorded in history and archeological findings.

For example, within a few decades of his lifetime, Jesus was mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians in passages that corroborate portions of the New Testament that describe the life and death of Jesus. (Sources here and below are from: History linked)

Historian Flavius Josephus wrote one of the earliest non-biblical accounts of Jesus.

The first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who according to Ehrman “is far and away our best source of information about first-century Palestine,” twice mentions Jesus in Jewish Antiquities, his massive 20-volume history of the Jewish people that was written around 93 A.D.

Thought to have been born a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus around 37 A.D., Josephus was a well-connected aristocrat and military leader in Palestine who served as a commander in Galilee during the first Jewish Revolt against Rome between 66 and 70 A.D. Although Josephus was not a follower of Jesus, “he was around when the early church was getting started, so he knew people who had seen and heard Jesus,” Mykytiuk says.

In one passage of Jewish Antiquities that recounts an unlawful execution, Josephus identifies the victim, James, as the “brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah.” While few scholars doubt the short account’s authenticity, says Mykytiuk, more debate surrounds Josephus’s lengthier passage about Jesus, known as the “Testimonium Flavianum,” which describes a man “who did surprising deeds” and was condemned to be crucified by Pilate. Mykytiuk agrees with most scholars that Christian scribes modified portions of the passage but did not insert it wholesale into the text.

Tacitus connects Jesus to his execution by Pontius Pilate.

Another account of Jesus appears in Annals of Imperial Rome, a first-century history of the Roman Empire written around 116 A.D. by the Roman senator and historian Tacitus. In chronicling the burning of Rome in 64 A.D., Tacitus mentions that Emperor Nero falsely blamed “the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius.”

As a Roman historian, Tacitus did not have any Christian biases in his discussion of the persecution of Christians by Nero, says Ehrman. “Just about everything he says coincides—from a completely different point of view, by a Roman author disdainful of Christians and their superstition—with what the New Testament itself says: Jesus was executed by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, for crimes against the state, and a religious movement of his followers sprang up in his wake.”

“When Tacitus wrote history, if he considered the information not entirely reliable, he normally wrote some indication of that for his readers,” Mykytiuk says in vouching for the historical value of the passage. “There is no such indication of potential error in the passage that mentions Christus.”

Additional Roman texts reference Jesus.

Shortly before Tacitus penned his account of Jesus, Roman governor Pliny the Younger wrote to Emperor Trajan that early Christians would “sing hymns to Christ as to a god.” Some scholars also believe Roman historian Suetonius references Jesus in noting that Emperor Claudius had expelled Jews from Rome who “were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus.”

Ehrman says this collection of snippets from non-Christian sources may not impart much information about the life of Jesus, “but it is useful for realizing that Jesus was known by historians who had reason to look into the matter. No one thought he was made up.”

.............

(Source below: Wiki)

Historical existence of Jesus

Most scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.[5][24][25] Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical textual criticism are applied to the New Testament, "we can no more
owever, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[19][20][23]

There are many other sources not but no need to provide them all. If you would like to read more please see an interesting article from the Biblical Archeology Society here linked for further reading.

................

If there are historical records then there must have been eyewitnesses. The fact that both the biblical records and sources outside of the biblical record testify to this fact is my evidence of eye witness accounts. If you believe there are no eye witness accounts of JESUS and these claims are not verified on the historical and archeological records than prove it. You made the claim now not me. The information provided in this post proves you are in error here.

Your welcome :)
None of those were eyewitnesses. Do you not understand the term? In fact they were all born after Jesus's death. Now that would be an interesting trick. For example your earliest source is Josephus. He was born 37 CE. At least three years after Jesus's death. How could he have been an eyewitness to Jesus?

Josephus - Wikipedia

You are also conflating historical Jesus, there probably was a Jesus, with mythological Jesus, the one that did all of the magic tricks. Did you see Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter? That was a mythological account of his life. It was not true. Myths can pop up very quickly after the death of a popular person. Look at all of the Elvis Presley myths. And that was in our modern age. You claimed that the Bible was supported by eyewitness accounts. You have not found one yet.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
None of those were eyewitnesses. Do you not understand the term? In fact they were all born after Jesus's death. Now that would be an interesting trick. For example your earliest source is Josephus. He was born 37 CE. At least three years after Jesus's death. How could he have been an eyewitness to Jesus?

Josephus - Wikipedia

You are also conflating historical Jesus, there probably was a Jesus, with mythological Jesus, the one that did all of the magic tricks. Did you see Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter? That was a mythological account of his life. It was not true. Myths can pop up very quickly after the death of a popular person. Look at all of the Elvis Presley myths. And that was in our modern age. You claimed that the Bible was supported by eyewitness accounts. You have not found one yet.

Goodness. I stand in awe at your denial. There you go with your hand waiving again. You do know right that if there was no eyewitnesses to historical events there would be no historical records right? Seems your going back to not being honest again and making strawman argument that no one is making. Who said Josephus was an eyewitness? I have made no such claims so why pretend that I have?

As posted earlier Josephus was a famous first century historian around not long after JESUS and an outside source and not Christian. As posted earlier, Josephus was a well-connected aristocrat and military leader in Palestine who served as a commander in Galilee during the first Jewish Revolt against Rome between 66 and 70 A.D.

Josephus was not a follower of Jesus (christian), “he was around when the early church was getting started, so he knew people who had seen and heard Jesus (eyewitness). So this is but one Historical Jewish record (not Christian) from a first century historian outside of Christianity giving eyewitness accounts from people he knew that had seen JESUS that were not Christian that were still living.

You have been provided the above non christian JEWISH record of multiple eyewitness accounts of JESUS; the biblical records from the Pauline and gospel records, and from Historians outside of the Christianity from the Roman Historical records (Tacticus) with all three bearing testimony of the eyewitness accounts of JESUS and verification of the truth of the biblical records.

Now notice what we have here. We have...

1. Historical records from the JEWS who were a hostile source to Christianity of eyewitness accounts of JESUS
2. Historical records from a Roman historians who were also a hostile source outside of Christianity of eyewitness accounts of JESUS.
3. The biblical records from the Pauline and Gospel scriptures from eyewitnesses of JESUS

All three; according to the biblical record are supported by; 1. The NON BELIEVING JEWS; the 2. THE NON BELIEVING ROMANS and the 3. CHRISTIANS who were present during the life of JESUS and all three Historical sources both from within Christianity and outside of Christianity say that there were eyewitness accounts of JESUS and that JESUS existed.

Either this is a massive conspiracy and everyone is lying here or everyone is telling the truth.

As shown according to Wiki already most scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.[5][24][25] Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical textual criticism are applied to the New Testament, "we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned."[26][27] There is no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[28][29]

Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.[5][6][7][note 1] Reconstructions of the historical Jesus are based on the Pauline epistles and the Gospels, while several non-Biblical sources also bear witness to the historical existence of Jesus. Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.[9][10]

Scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[11][12][13][14] Historical Jesus scholars typically contend that he was a Galilean Jew living in a time of messianic and apocalyptic expectations.[15][16] Some scholars credit the apocalyptic declarations of the gospels to him, while others portray his "Kingdom of God" as a moral one, and not apocalyptic in nature.[17]

The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the image portrayed in the gospel accounts.[18] These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish messiah and prophet of social change,[19][20] but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, nor the methods needed to construct it.[18][21][22] There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[19][20][23]

There are many other sources not but no need to provide them all. If you would like to read more please see an interesting article from the Biblical Archeology Society here linked for further reading.

............

Hmm then we have you with your hand waiving who cannot prove JESUS did not exist... My friend the evidence is there for all to see. Your denial is amazing :)
 
Last edited:

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
No, you made foolish and ignorant claims and your errors were explained to you. Instead of denying it the honest thing to do would have been to try to learn from your errors. Ask polite questions. It is always the wisest course to take when you are discussing things that you do not understand.

Yea, not really. Your not being honest now. I guess you have your faith and I have mine so we will have to agree to disagree :)
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
You are correct. It was there and I missed it. It was not very obvious there. You see when I do screw up I admit it and apologize. You have screwed up countless times. Did you apologize yet?

Well there you go thanks for being honest. It was pretty clear in the first line in the heading in brackets written as source all by itself. Anyhow good for you too bad you cannot do the same for the rest of your claims. One step at a time though... :)
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Goodness. I stand in awe. There you go with your hand waiving again. You do know right that if there was no eyewitnesses to historical events there would be no historical records right? Seems your going back to not being honest again and making strawman argument that no one is making. Who said Josephus was an eyewitness? I have made no such claims so why pretend that I have?

As posted earlier Josephus was a famous first century historian around not long after JESUS and an outside source and not Christian. As posted earlier, Josephus was a well-connected aristocrat and military leader in Palestine who served as a commander in Galilee during the first Jewish Revolt against Rome between 66 and 70 A.D.

Josephus was not a follower of Jesus (christian), “he was around when the early church was getting started, so he knew people who had seen and heard Jesus (eyewitness). So this is but one Historical Jewish record (not Christian) from a first century historian outside of Christianity giving eyewitness accounts from people he knew that had seen JESUS that were not Christian that were still living.

You have been provided the above non christian JEWISH record of multiple eyewitness accounts of JESUS; the biblical records from the Pauline and gospel records, and from Historians outside of the Christianity from the Roman Historical records (Tacticus) with all three bearing testimony of the eyewitness accounts of JESUS and verification of the truth of the biblical records.

Now notice what you have here. You have...

1. Historical records from the JEWS who were a hostile source to Christianity of eyewitness accounts of JESUS
2. Historical records from a Romans historian who were also a hostile source outside of Christianity of eyewitness accounts of JESUS.
3. The biblical records from the Pauline and Gospel scriptures from eyewitnesses of JESUS

All three; according to the biblical record; 1. The JEWS; the 2. ROMANS and the 3. Christians were present during the life of JESUS and all three Historical sources both from within Christianity and outside of Christianity say that JESUS existed.

Either everyone is lying here or everyone is telling the truth.

As shown according to Wiki already most scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.[5][24][25] Historian Michael Grant asserts that if conventional standards of historical textual criticism are applied to the New Testament, "we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned."[26][27] There is no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[28][29]

Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.[5][6][7][note 1] Reconstructions of the historical Jesus are based on the Pauline epistles and the Gospels, while several non-Biblical sources also bear witness to the historical existence of Jesus. Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and developing new and different research criteria.[9][10]

Scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[11][12][13][14] Historical Jesus scholars typically contend that he was a Galilean Jew living in a time of messianic and apocalyptic expectations.[15][16] Some scholars credit the apocalyptic declarations of the gospels to him, while others portray his "Kingdom of God" as a moral one, and not apocalyptic in nature.[17]

The portraits of Jesus that have been constructed in these processes have often differed from each other, and from the image portrayed in the gospel accounts.[18] These portraits include that of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet, charismatic healer, Cynic philosopher, Jewish messiah and prophet of social change,[19][20] but there is little scholarly agreement on a single portrait, nor the methods needed to construct it.[18][21][22] There are, however, overlapping attributes among the various portraits, and scholars who differ on some attributes may agree on others.[19][20][23]

There are many other sources not but no need to provide them all. If you would like to read more please see an interesting article from the Biblical Archeology Society here linked for further reading.

............

Hmm then we have you with your hand waiving who cannot prove JESUS did not exist... My friend the evidence is there for all to see. Your denial is amazing :)
You don't know what an eyewitness is. Epic fail.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Yea, not really. Your not being honest now. I guess you have your faith and I have mine so we will have to agree to disagree :)
Wrong again. I am the one being honest. Now can you support any of your claims? Why don't you start by looking up the term "eyewitness".
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
You don't know what an eyewitness is. Epic fail.
Wrong again. I am the one being honest. Now can you support any of your claims? Why don't you start by looking up the term "eyewitness".

There is no historical records without eyewitnesses. You have been provided three Historical records from different sources of eyewitness accounts of JESUS inside and outside of the biblical records from all people present in the life of JESUS.

1
. Historical records from the JEWS who were a hostile source to Christianity of eyewitness accounts of JESUS
2. Historical records from Roman historians who were also a hostile source outside of Christianity and the Jewish nation who provide eyewitness accounts of JESUS.
3. The biblical records from the Pauline and Gospel scriptures from eyewitnesses of JESUS

All three; according to the biblical record are supported by; 1. The NON BELIEVING JEWS; the 2. THE NON BELIEVING ROMANS and the 3. CHRISTIANS who were present during the life of JESUS and all three Historical sources both from within Christianity and outside of Christianity say that there were eyewitness accounts of JESUS and that JESUS existed and this is cerified by the History, Historians and academic scolarship.

Perhaps it might be helpful to the discussion if I ask you some simple questions....

1. Do you believe JESUS existed?
2. If you believe JESUS existed why and if not why not?

This should be fun :)
 
Last edited:

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
So any fool can wave their arms in the air and say the end is near and Christ is coming. Plenty have been doing exactly that for the last two hundred years. Of course the key difference between the JWs and the Baha’is isn’t whether or not we follow Christ. We both believe we do. The Key difference is something else, something that would fall on deaf ears if I mentioned it, much like the words of Noah in His day. The wise do not speak until they obtain a hearing.

I think that these scriptures sum up the finality of it all......

Jesus said.....“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’” (Matthew 7:21-23)

2 Timothy 2:19...
....“Jehovah knows those who belong to him,” [quoting Numbers 16:5] and, “Let everyone calling on the name of Jehovah renounce unrighteousness.” [quoting Joel 2:32]

Only God knows who qualifies for life by "doing the will of the Father"....these ones are abiding by God’s laws and are calling on the name of God in the way that others are not. He will be the judge. From the scripture in Matthew 7:21-23 you can see that "many" who call Jesus their "Lord" will be strongly rejected. On what grounds? Their failure to do as God says.....making excuses not to follow God’s clear directions.

I don’t believe the Bible is your guide but rather the teachings of your church, a very human and flawed organisation founded by a very human and flawed man, Charles Taze. It is no better than the rest of Christendom you like to condemn.

We are all free to believe whatever we wish.....but the great thing about God, (like he did in the days of Noah,) is that he knows what is in the hearts of men, and offers them every opportunity to change their ways. It means that we all have the same opportunity to heed the warning that he is having declared in all the earth during this “time of the end”. (Matthew 24:14) This period corresponds with the time that Noah was constructing the ark. All the while he preached to the people who chose, en mass to ignore him. There were not many arks....just one. No one survived in any other vessel. Why? Because no one else had one. What is the lesson?

Since "few" are on the road to life, we can safely say that the majority who claim that their beliefs reflect Jesus' teachings are sadly mistaken.....but that is for God and his Christ to determine. We are commanded to preach and make disciples (Matthew 28:19-20) and that is what we have done for the whole time that Jesus has been directing the work he assigned, just as he promised. Part of that work, like Jesus himself did, is exposing religious falsehood. The Pharisees hated him for it....enough to want him dead. (John 15:18-21)

We don't have an organization founded on the words of a flawed human being....we have an organisation founded firmly on the words of Jesus Christ......he is our only leader.

Baha’i’s have an organisation founded on the words of a flawed human being, whose role you accept without hesitation with no credentials except his empty claims. Double standard much? You claim not to be a Christian and yet you quote Christian scripture as if you understand it? And you don’t see a problem with that? Seriously?

The God of Jesus Christ demanded exclusive devotion and Baha’i have turned him into every god ever worshipped by all the unbelievers that Israel’s God rejected. These were the enemies of God’s people. When Israel fell away to the worship of false gods, Jehovah punished them. What your faith ignores in its quest for universalism, is mind boggling to me.
 

3rdAngel

Well-Known Member
Well, then I have thrown a dart in the dark and just happened to hit something thinking I wouldn't. :flushed:
To go with the more cliche example; is not being a stamp collector a hobby of yours?

I like talking to you. At least your nice to talk to and are respectful to others in your conversations. Yea I have spent my career as a Government scientist as an entomologist in pest management. Funny you used that example. Many thanks for your friendly replies though.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I think that these scriptures sum up the finality of it all......

Jesus said.....“Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’” (Matthew 7:21-23)

At the end of the day it is for God and God alone to judge us. If we start judging others and believing ourselves to be saved while others are condemned, we condemn ourselves. That is essentially what JWs do. They imagine themselves to be the one true faith. That is exactly the attitude Jesus criticises (Matthew 7:1-4, Matthew 5:22). Of course JWs don’t believe in hell.

2 Timothy 2:19...
....“Jehovah knows those who belong to him,” [quoting Numbers 16:5] and, “Let everyone calling on the name of Jehovah renounce unrighteousness.” [quoting Joel 2:32]

So you’ve now quoting from the Jehovah Witness Bible. OK.

Only God knows who qualifies for life by "doing the will of the Father"....these ones are abiding by God’s laws and are calling on the name of God in the way that others are not. He will be the judge. From the scripture in Matthew 7:21-23 you can see that "many" who call Jesus their "Lord" will be strongly rejected. On what grounds? Their failure to do as God says.....making excuses not to follow God’s clear directions.

So stop judging others, simple as that.

We are all free to believe whatever we wish.....but the great thing about God, (like he did in the days of Noah,) is that he knows what is in the hearts of men, and offers them every opportunity to change their ways. It means that we all have the same opportunity to heed the warning that he is having declared in all the earth during this “time of the end”. (Matthew 24:14) This period corresponds with the time that Noah was constructing the ark. All the while he preached to the people who chose, en mass to ignore him. There were not many arks....just one. No one survived in any other vessel. Why? Because no one else had one. What is the lesson?

The lesson is we should both be very certain that our lives are on a good foundation (Matthew 7:24-27) because when the storm comes we may be swept away.

Since "few" are on the road to life, we can safely say that the majority who claim that their beliefs reflect Jesus' teachings are sadly mistaken.....but that is for God and his Christ to determine. We are commanded to preach and make disciples (Matthew 28:19-20) and that is what we have done for the whole time that Jesus has been directing the work he assigned, just as he promised. Part of that work, like Jesus himself did, is exposing religious falsehood. The Pharisees hated him for it....enough to want him dead. (John 15:18-21)

What if you and your church are the ones spreading false teachings?

Interesting fact time. JWs have the lowest retention rate for their children of any religious group in the USA. Only a third of children who grow up as JW choose to remain a JW.

A closer look at Jehovah's Witnesses living in the U.S.

JWs in the USA also have the poorest levels of education of any religious group.

We don't have an organization founded on the words of a flawed human being....we have an organisation founded firmly on the words of Jesus Christ......he is our only leader.

You can claim to be a follower of Jesus to your voice can no longer speak, but ironically you’ve hit the nail on the head.

Matthew 7:21-23
Matthew 25:31-46

The very action of proclaiming yourselves the one and only true Christians looks to me like the kind of people Christ Himself condemns, dare I say to hell.

Baha’i’s have an organisation founded on the words of a flawed human being, whose role you accept without hesitation with no credentials except his empty claims. Double standard much? You claim not to be a Christian and yet you quote Christian scripture as if you understand it? And you don’t see a problem with that? Seriously?

You’re wrong again. This Baha’i spent 5 years searching for the truth inspired by the words of Jesus when He said:

The truth shall set you free (John 8:32)

Seek and Ye shall find (Matthew 7:7-8)

So as a Baha’i whether I’m quoting from the Baha’i scriptures, the Hebrew Bible, the Quran or New Testament its all sacred writings inspired by God Himself. You see, although I am a Baha’i I am also a Christian. Whether I’m any more or less a Christian is totally for God to decide. My role is the live the life so deeds not words are my adorning.

Matthew 7:15-20
James 2:14-26

So whether Bahá’u’lláh is the Return of Christ or just another false Prophet is a good question for us both to ponder. I’m open to investigating Christianity, Islam and the Baha’i Faith from any angle.

I’ve been asking myself the serious questions about the JWs. You seem like a nice person @Deeje but I have serious concerns and reservations about the religious organisation you’re part of. You’re saving grace ironically may have been your husband who wasn’t a JW and perhaps not even a Christian.

The God of Jesus Christ demanded exclusive devotion and Baha’i have turned him into every god ever worshipped by all the unbelievers that Israel’s God rejected. These were the enemies of God’s people. When Israel fell away to the worship of false gods, Jehovah punished them. What your faith ignores in its quest for universalism, is mind boggling to me.

Wrong about the Baha’i Faith once again. The Baha’i Faith appears more closely aligned to the New Testament and Christ’s Teachings than the JWs. You don’t even believe in life after death except for yourselves. You’re really in no position to comment on the Baha’i Faith as anything you say or think is through the lens of the JW movement. Free yourself.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
There is no historical records without eyewitnesses. You have been provided three Historical records from different sources of eyewitness accounts of JESUS inside and outside of the biblical records from all people present in the life of JESUS.


This is false and foolish. You state it only because you failed utterly in your claim. To be "eyewitness testimony" a name and what the person claimed are needed. Otherwise you only have hearsay. Hearsay is evidence as well but it is lower quality evidence. And this brings up a point. Eyewitness testimony is the lowest quality evidence allowed in a court of law. You do not even have the lowest quality legal evidence for your beliefs.

. Historical records from the JEWS who were a hostile source to Christianity of eyewitness accounts of JESUS

Nope, no such evidence exists. If you drop the term eyewitness you would be correct.

2. Historical records from Roman historians who were also a hostile source outside of Christianity and the Jewish nation who provide eyewitness accounts of JESUS.

Wrong, see above.

3. The biblical records from the Pauline and Gospel scriptures from eyewitnesses of JESUS

Wrong,see above.

All three; according to the biblical record are supported by; 1. The NON BELIEVING JEWS; the 2. THE NON BELIEVING ROMANS and the 3. CHRISTIANS who were present during the life of JESUS and all three Historical sources both from within Christianity and outside of Christianity say that there were eyewitness accounts of JESUS and that JESUS existed and this is cerified by the History, Historians and academic scolarship.

Not "certified" . You use terms that you cannot support. Most historians accept the claim of a historical Jesus. They do not accept the claims of a magical Jesus, the one that you believe in.

Perhaps it might be helpful to the discussion if I ask you some simple questions....

1. Do you believe JESUS existed?
2. If you believe JESUS existed why and if not why not?

This should be fun :)

I believe that a historical Jesus existed. It is not an outrageous claim and it is supported by weak evidence.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Okay, clear this up for me: when you "seek" God, how do you know you've found Him? How do you assure yourself that what you've "received" is not in fact the product of your own mind?

Then, if possible, go further, and explain how anybody else can know when they've been "authentically" revealed some truth -- and how you know that some so-called prophets have, and others have been deceived.

Now remember, this is the ultimately important question, so there shouldn't really be any guesswork -- you gotta know if you're betting everything on it.
AFAIK, revelation isn’t particularly made to individuals. Prophets prophesied to the nation of Israel. The “official” party line is that revelation comes through the church, i.e., the ekklesia, the body of Christ. We in the post-modern Western world don’t understand this particular sitz im leben.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
So. God, deliberately and with malicious intent, is playing Special Favorites? And everyone else, gets the proverbial Stick? Forever and ever?

What a "nice" god that is!

And very convenient too: it even works against other theists! If someone disagrees with your personal and particular twist on the Holy Writ? Obviously, god has clouded their mind (to what end, nobody seems to know...) but it's just best if the mind-clouded one is put away, deported or put into an internment camp right away. Because making them into a slave is no longer a viable strategy... right?
My question is: How is the Bible “the things of the spirit of God” mentioned in the passage? Where did that bastardization come from?
 
Top