• 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!

Fulfillment of Prophecy in the New Testament

Thief

Rogue Theologian
:facepalm:

Normally, I would probably leave it at that, but not today. Every now and again I need to point out just how truly rude and disrespectful you are. In your arrogance you make claims to seeing things that we Jews do not, unable to acknowledge that Jews do not simply see things differently than you, but actually may see things that you do not.
and the Carpenter must have been regarded as extremely arrogant

None so blind as those who will not see
so He said

His entire ministry flew in the face of what Jews believed to be......obvious

and it was the Carpenter's mission to reveal …..insight

conflict in vision?

oy!
 

Nova2216

Active Member
well played
thank you

but I believe no two people will actually do as scripture implores

we humans are formed as unique individuals
and in turn we become unique spirits

but of course......that we some day walk together among the angelic
a certain amount of GRACE
may be required

I am willing to introduce you to many people who do just that.

The churches of Christ salute you (Rom.16:16)
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
YES, the unbeliever can understand the bible according to (Eph.3:3,4).

That's why men are commanded to go to all the world and preach the gospel to unbelievers (Mt.28:18-20) (Mark 16:15,16) (2Tim.2:2).



The main role of the Holy Spirit was to bring the revelation of God to men (Jn 14:26 ; 16:13).

In the first century it was through the apostles that the Holy Spirit spoke (Mt.10:19,20).



Today we have the completed revelation of God (the bible).

Today we have all things pertaining to life and godliness contained in the bible according to (2Peter 1:3) (2Tim.3:14-17).

According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:

All men need to do is read the word of God to understand it (Eph.3:3,4) (2Tim.2:15).


The Holy Spirit does nothing TO US today.

The Holy Spirit does things FOR US according to (Rom.8:26).


¶ Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.


Thanks

That makes sense.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
The usual thing that Baha'is have told me is that... "Christians interpreted it literally. It was meant figuratively." With that a Baha'i can interpret any verse anyway they want. Plus, they can always pull the, "They weren't eyewitnesses" card and say the writings were based on oral traditions.
Exactly. I understand a book such as Revelations being interpreted figuratively but it still has to be interpreted figuratively in line with its own narrative. And they say there weren't eye witnesses, but if people in those days can be in doubt for writing something a few years later, how much more so shouldn't we trust someone's views of Jesus when they say things 2000 years after he lived. That is inconsistent.

One contradiction that I've questioned them on is the one where they say that Abraham took Ishmael, not Isaac, to be sacrificed. For them, this is true because Baha'u'llah said it. No other proof is necessary.
So they are just adding what they subjectively wish to. Although.... I haven't read much Baha'i literature so I don't know if it as only a few or all of them who come to such conclusions. So I won't paint them all with one brush.

Healing crippled legs and blind eyes... cleanse lepers and brought two people that had died back to life? And Baha'is say that Jesus could not have floated off to space because that too is scientifically impossible, so then he probably couldn't have walked on water. I don't think very many, if any, Baha'is are going to say that Jesus performed any of those miracles. Yet, they believe he was born of a virgin? Oh, and another "yet"... They believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God and that Jesus is a manifestation?
Yeah. So I don't know the criteria here for saying that something is impossible or not.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
As you know, Jews believe that the Mosaic Covenant is everlasting, and they have Torah scriptures to back up their beliefs… So what gives?

The Hebrew scriptures speak of a New Covenant that God would make with the Jews. This New Covenant is the everlasting Covenant.

As I said, I believe there is an everlasting covenant God made with mankind never to leave man alone without sending a Messenger, but each time a new Messenger comes he make a new covenant with His followers.

What does that even mean if there are hundreds of even thousands of years between Baha'i Messengers?

Here is an excerpt from a Baha'iTeachings.org article that explains what the eternal (everlasting) covenant is and how it is still in force today. I suggest you read the whole article by clicking on the link below.

“The overall covenant God made with His followers in Judaism, known to Jews as the Mosaic Covenant, and to Christians as the Old Covenant, put forth the stipulation of the oneness of God – “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:2) – as the primary law of the Ten Commandments. In exchange for following those principles, God promised that he would never leave His followers without guidance:

Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid … for the Lord thy God, he it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee. – Deuteronomy 31:6.


That says nothing about the Baha'i concept of a Messenger.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
And that's what the Baha'is say. Except... what societal laws did Jesus teach? Like if a man's bull gores his neighbor?

It is said that Jesus did not found a religion. This is true in that Jesus came to start His Kingdom on earth, a Kingdom where God rules through His Spirit in the citizens. The basic rule is love and this is guided by what the Bible shows us about God and what He wants.

Is there wiggle room in the Hebrew word used for "eternal" to allow for Christians and Baha'is to say that God changes his laws? But it's more like he gets rid of them. With Christians it seems like they still refer to moral laws and maybe a few others, though. Baha'is... they have their own laws. They just say that the "spiritual" laws never change, just the social laws.

The Mosaic Covenant was for Jews only and the Law of Moses was for them only. It was not an eternal covenant as God promised the Jews a new Covenant. This Covenant is what Jesus claims to have brought in and is the eternal covenant and the OT and NT show that this New Covenant will also go to the Gentiles.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Her is one method: We can dig up ancient documents and writing, using the tools and science of archaeology, and learn the ancient languages. Then we can date these languages and styles of writing to certain time periods and see how they change over time. If a document uses a writing style that we know is from 500BC ,yet claims it was written from 1500BC, then we would know that the writer was most likely talking nonsense. That is not skeptic assumption. You should look into why the Apocryphal books are rejected to easily see my point. Some are even rejected because they refer to objects that we know were created centuries after Jesus.

Scholars that that method amongst others to determine the date of a document that is dug up, but it is not know if that document is the original, which may actually be much older than a copy.

And yes, you are just making claims. You are assuming that the book is written by Luke, even though the author doesn't say so. All the other stuff is fluff. Where is your evidence of it? Are you relying just on traditional hearsay or actual archaeological evidence?
You are the one assuming hear.

I presume that the authorship was probably known initially and that what became tradition was not just a name that was invented. The start of the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles show that the author was the same person and there is a lot of internal evidence as well as similarities in style and language.
The Authorship of Luke's Gospel (St Luke)

If it is there because you want it to be there then your conclusions are no more valid than Muslims saying that Muhammed is foretold in the Song of Solomon.

Faith is like that. Anyone can go a certain way with analysis and then a decision either way meant a leap of faith.

Do you have a link to this?

Yeshayahu - Isaiah - Chapter 9
You would look at verses 5,6 in this Jewish translation.
I have seen others done differently again. I have heard of one Jewish translation that runs all the names together as one name.

It seems that as a believer (I was one as well) you are filling in gaps between passages to reach your conclusions. Using this method, anything you wish could be there.

Maybe at times, but I start from a position of believing that the Gospel writers actually were witnesses of Jesus and what He did or got their info from people who did know.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
My interpretation is as good as yours, but you are free to have your beliefs and I will have mine.

Thanks but your's is not an interpretation, it denies what is written. You deny that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth and the Paraclete so that you can say that Baha'u'llah is the Spirit of Truth.

I will leave it to you and others on the forum that care about prophecies to discuss prophecies. Unless they are very specific, prophecies are not a reliable indicator because they can always be denied, and they can also be twisted to mean whatever people want them to mean.

Nevertheless Peter at Acts 2:16 does say that part of that Joel prophecy is speaking of that Pentecost giving of the Spirit and it also means that that Pentecost was in the last days.

There are so many prophecies but Micah 7:12 is a good one.............................................. From: William Sears, Thief in the Night

I have a variety of translations of Micah 7:12-14 and when I read the context it is about the Jews coming to
Israel at the end of the age and dwelling there alone and being fed and shown signs by God.
William Sears, an ex Anglican wasn't he? -no doubt used the KJV.

Jesus’ words were never abrogated, only His Dispensation was abrogated.

You do however deny many of His words.

Brian2 said:
Examples of parts of the Bible which are denied and replaced by the teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha are written about in this post. Eg John 14:26, John 15:26. You deny that the Spirit of Truth is the Holy Spirit that was given at Pentecost.
Another might be John 14:3 where Jesus promises to return and Acts 1:9-11 where Baha'i denies that the same Jesus will come back in the same way the disciples saw Him go into heaven.
I could go on for a while with examples if you like.
How about Luke 1:32 where it is said that Jesus is the one to sit on the throne of David forever as in Isa 9:6-7?
How about Acts 8:26-40 where Isa 53 is shown to be a prophecy about Jesus? etc etc


None of these are denials or replacements of the Bible. All of them are just different ways that people interpret the Bible. Christians believe they have shown something and Baha’is believe that have shown something, and in reality, they are just different interpretations of the same verses. But I am not going to cover the same ground again. If you do not understand the logic by now, you never will.

No they are a denial of both parts of the Bible and also of Jesus words. It is not real interpretation. Show me how you interpret those passages to be about Baha'u'llah without denying that they are about Jesus.
Even the very dispensation of Jesus, which you say is not over, is squashed when Baha'u'llah wants to take away the very prophecies that speak of it (eg Isa 53) and apply them to himself when they have already been applied to Jesus in the NT.
How is that not denying the Bible?
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
The Messiah or the anointed one in Hebrew is Hamashiach המשיח.
A messiah or an anointed one in Hebrew is mashiach משיח.
The text tells of the death of a messiah, an anointed one.
However, Christians, over the ages, were looking to read in everything in the Tanach as referring to Jesus, and so changed the word from a to the. That's what happened.

Maybe yet the prophecy as a whole does seem Messianic and the time period given does take us to the time of Jesus if started at the decree to rebuild Jesusalem.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Do many Christians believe... That God created Adam and Eve... That He created everything in 6 days... That He was in the Garden and spoke with Adam... Tons of things that Baha'is deny really happened. They wiggle out of it by saying those things were symbolic. Was Noah 500 years old when the Flood came? Was there a worldwide flood? Did Moses' walking cane turn into a snake? Did Jonah get swallowed by a big fish? What do Baha'is really believe about any of these?

I have not done a count amongst Christians. To me the Bible is fundamental to my faith. I believe that the days of creation were not necessarily 6 24hour days. I believe that the world wide flood was probably many large local floods. (A large local flood can be read in the Genesis account since some words translated one way can be translated in other ways, eg earth can be translated as land and mountains can be translated as high hills.etc) But I guess that is not really what we are talking about.
Many Baha'is I imagine do not worry themselves about much of the Bible. They are concerned with those parts of the Bible which affect their beliefs and which Baha'u'llah mentioned.

The usual ones that I ask them about are that Baha'u'llah says that Ishmael, not Isaac, was taken to be sacrificed. If that is true, then the Bible is wrong and has been for hundreds of years. The other one is all the verses that talk about the resurrection. Baha'is say it didn't happen... that Jesus' body died and stayed dead. So all those verses are wrong? No, they can wiggle out of it by saying they "interpret" it differently. And so do Atheists. They can say that the whole Bible is made up fiction.... nothing but myth... and that's their "interpretation". They are not denying that the stories exist in a Book. Those stories are real. They just interpret them as being fictional. Not much different than what Baha'is do to the Bible.

I did not know that about Ishmael,,,,,,,,,,maybe that came from juggling Islam also in the mix and what they may say about Ishmael. I do find it amazing that Baha'is do not seem to realise that what they call interpretation is not really interpretation, but is straight out denial and replacing with the teachings of Baha'u'llah. But that sort of thing happens when we believe stuff,,,,,,,,,,,,our eyes can be closed to things that go against our beliefs.

But, who knows, maybe they are right. Like really a 6 day Creation less than 10,000 years ago? Really, the seas parted and then closed back up and drowned the Egyptian army? And really, Jesus and many other dead people came back to life. And really, Jesus floated off into space? Tough stuff to believe. And I would be surprised if those stories are literal true. And I don't know of one Baha'i that would deny that they don't take many of the things in the Bible as literally true. So what's the debate about? Baha'is deny things that Christians believe are true.

I think that Baha'i is a diverse faith and that there are many opinions amongst them about various things in the Bible. But yes they do deny things that Christians believe to be true, just as they deny things that Buddhists believe and that Hindus believe and Muslims believe etc. That is the nature of a religion that wants to say most religions are from God. They also have to say that most have been corrupted. Otherwise God IS a serial liar who makes stuff up for some people and makes other stuff up for others.
BUT at least they know what Baha'u'llah taught even if it is hard to read and understand.
Personally I prefer someone whom others write about and what he has said and done,,, it is less like someone claiming stuff for themselves and being their own authority.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
If Christians understood that they believe in lies from "the beginning, their eyes would be opened to what the scriptures actually tell us about the Messiah and what would happen to Him. That's how I see it anyway."

:)
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
Maybe yet the prophecy as a whole does seem Messianic and the time period given does take us to the time of Jesus if started at the decree to rebuild Jesusalem.
Maybe and if are big assumptions.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I just want to point out that you do know there is room in the Jewish view for non-Jews, yes? It's not exclusive to Jews and you need not convert to mean anything; just that those non-Jews are not under the Torah Covenant.

Thanks. Yes I converted to Judaism, or should I say, to the same God, but I'm under the New Covenant that God promised to the Jews,,,,,,,,,,,they one they seem to deny is even going to be a new covenant these days.
It is interesting to me that not only Isaiah, but also Jesus did not want certain Jews to under stand what He said and turn to Him and be saved. Those Jews were mainly the leaders of His day it seems. The whole idea of only part of Israel believing and the rest going on as usual and kicking the Christians out was part of what God wanted to happen.
As Isa 43:8-13 tells us, the Jews, the ones who have eyes but are blind and have ears but are deaf, are God's witnesses to the truth of God Himself and His message.
 

Rival

se Dex me saut.
Staff member
Premium Member
Thanks. Yes I converted to Judaism, or should I say, to the same God, but I'm under the New Covenant that God promised to the Jews,,,,,,,,,,,they one they seem to deny is even going to be a new covenant these days.
It is interesting to me that not only Isaiah, but also Jesus did not want certain Jews to under stand what He said and turn to Him and be saved. Those Jews were mainly the leaders of His day it seems. The whole idea of only part of Israel believing and the rest going on as usual and kicking the Christians out was part of what God wanted to happen.
As Isa 43:8-13 tells us, the Jews, the ones who have eyes but are blind and have ears but are deaf, are God's witnesses to the truth of God Himself and His message.
No, I am talking about Noahidism.

You have not converted to Judaism.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
they one they seem to deny is even going to be a new covenant these days.
That's only because we read the text which says that the terms of the covenant will be the same but the nature of it and its transmission will be new, so one can't be under a "New" delivery system if one is not under the original content.
It is interesting to me that not only Isaiah, but also Jesus did not want certain Jews to under stand what He said and turn to Him and be saved. Those Jews were mainly the leaders of His day it seems. The whole idea of only part of Israel believing and the rest going on as usual and kicking the Christians out was part of what God wanted to happen.
As Isa 43:8-13 tells us, the Jews, the ones who have eyes but are blind and have ears but are deaf, are God's witnesses to the truth of God Himself and His message.
I'm not sure where you get the idea that Isaiah wanted certain people not to understand him. He speaks of the fact that historically, many Jews ignored God's word, but Isaiah also states in 48:14, "assemble, ALL OF YOU", and he speaks to all the people trying to get them to return to God.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
So you interpret because of what you need to find.

I interpret because of what the passage tells us.

As mentioned in another post, the sabbath and circumcision are eternal, and the laws of the Torah (the content of that mosaic covenant) is eternal and to be fulfilled eternally, without change, as it is perfect and God is perfect.

As I said, surely the laws can change in different circumstance. Same principles behind them, just different times and places.

Well, you aren't under the Mosaic covenant, but the renewed covenant was for the Jews also (it invokes the Torah laws explicitly).

How do you know it invokes the exact same Torah laws and not the Spirit of God in us to guide us as a replacement of the written commands, and a new heart that wants to do what is right?
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
If that one passage has been interpreted wrong ..................

Acts 1:10 And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

"same Jesus" coming the "same way".
That is not interpretation, that is just reading what it says.
What is your interpretation that does not deny what it says?

Having faith in a flesh bodily reurection when Jesus also says the flesh amounts to nothing, is to me a foundation of sand.

The context of that reference is the eating of Jesus flesh and drinking of His blood. Nothing to do with whether Jesus rose bodily,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,which the gospels plainly tell us that He did.

Thus disbelief is death and Faith is life which the 2nd death (Disbelief) can not overtake. It all happens here and now. This flesh body then dies and disperses back to selments that mingle. Into other forms and the Spirit live on in death or in life and all the states in between.

Romans 8:22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies.

Nevertheless we do have a bodily resurrection.
But the important part is that it is the same Jesus who comes back. If Jesus was a spirit and went to heaven as a spirit and stayed there as a spirit while Baha'u'llah was walking the earth then the same Jesus did not come back.
 
Top