• 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!

Christianity vs Baha'i

Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Skywalker said:
Whats the difference between the physical and spiritual body of Jesus resurrecting? The Old Testament talks about Jesus resurrecting from the dead. Why cant the physical body of Jesus rise from the dead? God is omnipotent.
Click to expand...
The difference between the physical and spiritual body of Jesus is that one is physical and one is spiritual.

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.

Jesus said that spirit and flesh are not equivalent. The spirit quickens, the flesh profits nothing. The flesh profits nothing because it is subject to sin and it is mortal, not everlasting.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

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.
Skywalker said:
The new name in that verse is a reference to growing in God. Why is God going to give us a white stone with a new name? | GotQuestions.org
Click to expand...
I have never heard such an interpretation. Baha'is believe that the new name was Baha'u'llah, which no man knew except Him.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

I have never heard such an interpretation. Baha'is believe that the new name was Baha'u'llah, which no man knew except Him. The name of the city of God was the new Jerusalem, which was brought by Baha'u'llah:

“The time foreordained unto the peoples and kindreds of the earth is now come. The promises of God, as recorded in the holy Scriptures, have all been fulfilled. Out of Zion hath gone forth the Law of God, and Jerusalem, and the hills and land thereof, are filled with the glory of His Revelation. Happy is the man that pondereth in his heart that which hath been revealed in the Books of God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Meditate upon this, O ye beloved of God, and let your ears be attentive unto His Word, so that ye may, by His grace and mercy, drink your fill from the crystal waters of constancy, and become as steadfast and immovable as the mountain in His Cause.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 12-13
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Trailblazer said:
The difference between the physical and spiritual body of Jesus is that one is physical and one is spiritual.

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.

Jesus said that spirit and flesh are not equivalent. The spirit quickens, the flesh profits nothing. The flesh profits nothing because it is subject to sin and it is mortal, not everlasting.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

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.

I have never heard such an interpretation. Baha'is believe that the new name was Baha'u'llah, which no man knew except Him.

Revelation 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

I have never heard such an interpretation. Baha'is believe that the new name was Baha'u'llah, which no man knew except Him. The name of the city of God was the new Jerusalem, which was brought by Baha'u'llah:

“The time foreordained unto the peoples and kindreds of the earth is now come. The promises of 13 God, as recorded in the holy Scriptures, have all been fulfilled. Out of Zion hath gone forth the Law of God, and Jerusalem, and the hills and land thereof, are filled with the glory of His Revelation. Happy is the man that pondereth in his heart that which hath been revealed in the Books of God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Meditate upon this, O ye beloved of God, and let your ears be attentive unto His Word, so that ye may, by His grace and mercy, drink your fill from the crystal waters of constancy, and become as steadfast and immovable as the mountain in His Cause.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 12-13
Click to expand...

Do you agree with my interpretation of that verse? That verse is a reference to believers, not Baha'u'llah.
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Skywalker said:
I used the word progressive revelation about the Covenants because the New Covenant is related to the Old Covenant and the New Testament is related to Old Testament prophecies about the coming Messiah.
Click to expand...
Yes, that was progressive revelation, from the Old Testament to the New Testament.
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Skywalker said:
That's why I don't believe that the verse is about Baha'u'llah.
Click to expand...
I believe the verse is Jesus telling the churches to listen to Him, telling them that He will return with a new name which will be written on a white stone.

It is all explained in this article. Exploring Christ’s New Name
Here is an excerpt from that article:

In fact, Christ declared that those who would overcome the trials of the end days would receive His new name:

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God … and I will write upon him my new name. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. – Revelation 3:12-13

This shows that not only will Christ not come in His own name, but those who try to come in His name will deceive many.

For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. – Matthew 24:5

Clearly, no one, not even Christ Himself, can come in the name of Christ. Anyone doing so would be false. Of course, Baha’u’llah does not do this. He does not claim the name Jesus Christ nor claim to be the person Jesus Christ. Instead, He claims to be the Return of Christ because He is the Return of the Spirit of Christ in a new name, just as Christ prophesied.​
 
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
I believe that those verses directly state that Jesus is the Messiah but people don't want to believe it because it's a hard truth. The book of Job refers to the Messiah as an Redeemer and a Mediator. Do you think that rabbis teachings that there are two Messiahs is why most Jewish people reject Jesus. How could Isaiah David and Israel be the Messiah? The Messiah is a person who is to come and Israel is a nation or an ethnic group not a person.
Click to expand...

I believe that scripture has to be brought together to be fully understood. If God is truly the author of the Word, as I believe He is, then there has to be an overarching design to all the prophecies. Many of the same truths are repeated by different prophets in different ways.

Most Jews do not believe in two Messiahs, but they do have difficulty with passages of scripture that indicate the servant nature of the Messiah. For example, Zechariah 9:9 says, 'Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ***, as upon a colt the foal of an ***.' This passage is accepted by most Jews (Talmud, Sanhedrin 98a) as a Messianic prophecy, but it does not sit well with the idea of a King bringing judgment and destruction to the nations opposing Jerusalem. To a Christian reading the New Testament it is colourfully evident because the passage is quoted in connection with the triumphal entry of Christ into Jerusalem [Matthew 21:5].

There is good reason to call Israel the Messiah, for it says in Jeremiah 10:16, 'The portion of Jacob is not like them: for he is the former of all things; and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: The LORD of hosts is his name.'

What tends to be overlooked, however, is the possibility that Israel is both an individual Messiah, the head, and a corporate Messiah, the body. Christians know that Jesus Christ is the head, and that his body, spiritually, is the true Church, the corporate Messiah. In other words, Israel is both a head and a body!
 
Last edited:
Redemptionsong

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
InvestigateTruth said:
It is not like the whole Bible is either literal or the whole Bible is completely metaphorical.

It is obvious when Bible says, out of Jesse, it is talking about someone who will be descendant of Jesse.
There is no evidence in New Testament that Jesus was descendant of David. I am still waiting for you to quote.
Click to expand...

I agree that the meaning of every passage has to be studied carefully. In many cases there can be a layered meaning.

Here are some helpful notes on the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
'1. The genealogy given in Matthew is the genealogy of Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, his father in the eyes of the law. The genealogy given in Luke is the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and is the human genealogy of Jesus Christ in actual fact. The Gospel of Matthew was written for Jews. All through it Joseph is prominent, Mary is scarcely mentioned. In Luke, on the other hand, Mary is the chief personage in the whole account of the Saviour's conception and birth. Joseph is brought in only incidentally and because he was Mary's husband. In all of this, of course, there is a deep significance.
2. In Matthew, Jesus appears as the Messiah. In Luke He appears as 'the son of Man', our Brother and Redeemer, who belongs to the whole race and claims kindred with all kinds and conditions of men. So in Matthew, the genealogy descends from Abraham to Joseph and Jesus, because all the predictions and promises touching the Messiah are fulfilled in Him. But in Luke, the genealogy is traced back to the head of the whole race, and shows the relation of the Second Adam to the First.
3. Joseph's line is the strictly royal line from David to Joseph. In Luke, though the line of descent is from David, it is not the royal line. In this Jesus is descended from David through Nathan, David's son indeed, but not in the royal line, and the list follows a line quite distinct from the royal line.
4. The Messiah, according to prediction, was to be the actual son of David according to the flesh (2 Samuel 7:12-19; Psalm 89:3, 4, 34-37; 132:11; Acts 2:30; 13:22,23; Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8) These prophecies are fulfilled by Jesus being the son of Mary, who was a lineal descendant of David, though not in the royal line. Joseph, who was of the royal line, was not his father according to the flesh, but was his father in the eyes of the law.
5. Mary was a descendant of David through her father, Heli. It is true that Luke 2:23 says that Joseph was the son of Heli. The simple explanation of this is that, Mary being a woman, her name according to Jewish usage could not come into the genealogy, males alone forming the line, so Joseph's name is introduced in the place of Mary's, he being Mary's husband, Heli was his father-in-law and so Joseph is called the son of Heli, and the line thus completed, While Joseph was son-in-law of Heli, according to the flesh he was in actual fact the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16).
6. Two genealogies are absolutely necessary to trace the lineage of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the one the royal and legal, and the other the natural and literal, and these two genealogies we find, the legal and royal in Mattew's Gospel, the Gospel of law and kingship; the natural and literal in Luke's, the Gospel of humanity.
7. We are told in Jeremiah 22:30 any descendant of Jeconiah could not come to the throne of David, and Joseph was of this line, and while Joseph's genealogy furnishes the royal line for Jesus, his son before the law, nevertheless Jeremiah's prediction is fulfilled to the very letter, for Jesus, strictly speaking, was not of the seed of Jeconiah. If Jesus had been the son of Joseph in reality, He could not have come to the throne, but He is Mary's son through Nathan, and can come to the throne legally by her marrying Joseph and so clearing His way legally to it.' [R.A. Torrey]
 
Last edited:
InvestigateTruth

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
I agree that the meaning of every passage has to be studied carefully. In many cases there can be a layered meaning.

Here are some helpful notes on the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
'1. The genealogy given in Matthew is the genealogy of Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, his father in the eyes of the law. The genealogy given in Luke is the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and is the human genealogy of Jesus Christ in actual fact. The Gospel of Matthew was written for Jews. All through it Joseph is prominent, Mary is scarcely mentioned. In Luke, on the other hand, Mary is the chief personage in the whole account of the Saviour's conception and birth. Joseph is brought in only incidentally and because he was Mary's husband. In all of this, of course, there is a deep significance.
2. In Matthew, Jesus appears as the Messiah. In Luke He appears as 'the son of Man', our Brother and Redeemer, who belongs to the whole race and claims kindred with all kinds and conditions of men. So in Matthew, the genealogy descends from Abraham to Joseph and Jesus, because all the predictions and promises touching the Messiah are fulfilled in Him. But in Luke, the genealogy is traced back to the head of the whole race, and shows the relation of the Second Adam to the First.
3. Joseph's line is the strictly royal line from David to Joseph. In Luke, though the line of descent is from David, it is not the royal line. In this Jesus is descended from David through Nathan, David's son indeed, but not in the royal line, and the list follows a line quite distinct from the royal line.
4. The Messiah, according to prediction, was to be the actual son of David according to the flesh (2 Samuel 7:12-19; Psalm 89:3, 4, 34-37; 132:11; Acts 2:30; 13:22,23; Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8) These prophecies are fulfilled by Jesus being the son of Mary, who was a lineal descendant of David, though not in the royal line. Joseph, who was of the royal line, was not his father according to the flesh, but was his father in the eyes of the law.
5. Mary was a descendant of David through her father, Heli. It is true that Luke 2:23 says that Joseph was the son of Heli. The simple explanation of this is that, Mary being a woman, her name according to Jewish usage could not come into the genealogy, males alone forming the line, so Joseph's name is introduced in the place of Mary's, he being Mary's husband, Heli was his father-in-law and so Joseph is called the son of Heli, and the line thus completed, While Joseph was son-in-law of Heli, according to the flesh he was in actual fact the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16).
6. Two genealogies are absolutely necessary to trace the lineage of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the one the royal and legal, and the other the natural and literal, and these two genealogies we find, the legal and royal in Mattew's Gospel, the Gospel of law and kingship; the natural and literal in Luke's, the Gospel of humanity.
7. We are told in Jeremiah 22:30 any descendant of Jeconiah could not come to the throne of David, and Joseph was of this line, and while Joseph's genealogy furnishes the royal line for Jesus, his son before the law, nevertheless Jeremiah's prediction is fulfilled to the very letter, for Jesus, strictly speaking, was not of the seed of Jeconiah. If Jesus had been the son of Joseph in reality, He could not have come to the throne, but He is Mary's son through Nathan, and can come to the throne legally by her marrying Joseph and so clearing His way legally to it.' [R.A. Torrey]
Click to expand...
I cannot find any evidence that father of Mary was Heli.
If that was true, we must have been able to find a verse in Bible that actually says, Heli, was Mary's father.

It is a conjecture.
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Trailblazer said:
I believe the verse is Jesus telling the churches to listen to Him, telling them that He will return with a new name which will be written on a white stone.

It is all explained in this article. Exploring Christ’s New Name
Here is an excerpt from that article:

In fact, Christ declared that those who would overcome the trials of the end days would receive His new name:

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God … and I will write upon him my new name. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. – Revelation 3:12-13

This shows that not only will Christ not come in His own name, but those who try to come in His name will deceive many.

For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. – Matthew 24:5

Clearly, no one, not even Christ Himself, can come in the name of Christ. Anyone doing so would be false. Of course, Baha’u’llah does not do this. He does not claim the name Jesus Christ nor claim to be the person Jesus Christ. Instead, He claims to be the Return of Christ because He is the Return of the Spirit of Christ in a new name, just as Christ prophesied.​
Click to expand...

Revelation 2:17 doesn't say my new name, it says a new name known only to the one who receives it.

Isn't claiming that he's the return of the spirit of Christ a subtle way of coming in the name of Christ?
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Trailblazer said:
I believe the verse is Jesus telling the churches to listen to Him, telling them that He will return with a new name which will be written on a white stone.

It is all explained in this article.

Exploring Christ’s New Name
Click to expand...

I believe that the new name referenced in Revelation 3: 12 is a reference to the holiness of Christ. Its not a reference to Jesus having a new name. Why is God going to give us a white stone with a new name? | GotQuestions.org

• One of the better-accepted explanations of the white stone has to do with the high priest’s breastplate, which contained twelve stones. Each of these stones had the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel engraved on it (Exodus 28:21). As he ministered in the temple, the high priest bore the names of God’s people into God’s presence. In the same way, the “white stone” with the believer’s name written on it could be a reference to our standing in God’s presence.

• Another widely held explanation suggests that the white stone may be a translucent precious stone such as a diamond. The word translated “white” in Revelation 2:17 is leukos and can also mean “brilliant, bright.” This interpretation holds that on the stone is written the name of Christ, not the name of the believer. Revelation mentions that the name of Christ is written on the foreheads of the saints (Revelation 3:12; Revelation 14:1, and Revelation 14:20).

The best theory regarding the meaning of the white stone probably has to do with the ancient Roman custom of awarding white stones to the victors of athletic games. The winner of a contest was awarded a white stone with his name inscribed on it. This served as his “ticket” to a special awards banquet. According to this view, Jesus promises the overcomers entrance to the eternal victory celebration in heaven. The “new name” most likely refers to the Holy Spirit’s work of conforming believers to the holiness of Christ (see Romans 8:29; Colossians 3:10).
Click to expand...
 
firedragon

firedragon

Veteran Member
Redemptionsong said:
5. Mary was a descendant of David through her father, Heli. It is true that Luke 2:23 says that Joseph was the son of Heli. The simple explanation of this is that, Mary being a woman, her name according to Jewish usage could not come into the genealogy, males alone forming the line, so Joseph's name is introduced in the place of Mary's, he being Mary's husband,
Click to expand...

Who said that if you dont mind??
 
InvestigateTruth

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
I believe that the new name referenced in Revelation 3: 12 is a reference to the holiness of Christ. Its not a reference to Jesus having a new name. Why is God going to give us a white stone with a new name? | GotQuestions.org
Click to expand...
In our view, when the Bible is saying Christ returns with a new name, and that new name is written in believers, this is an allusion to the name "Baha". Christ returned with a new name "Baha", and this new name was written on believers "Bahai".
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
InvestigateTruth said:
In our view, when the Bible is saying Christ returns with a new name, and that new name is written in believers, this is an allusion to the name "Baha". Christ returned with a new name "Baha", and this new name was written on believers "Bahai".
Click to expand...

How is Bahai written on believers? What did Baha change when he returned? The Bible says that there will be peace for a thousand years.
 
InvestigateTruth

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
How is Bahai written on believers? What did Baha change when he returned? The Bible says that there will be peace for a thousand years.
Click to expand...

A new name written on believers, means God shall give a new name to the believers. They won't be called Christian anymore.

Isaiah 62:2. Expressing his zeal for the glory and salvation of Zion, the prophet Isaiah said, "You shall be called by a new name which the mouth of the Lord shall designate" (Isaiah 62:2).



Yes, God said when Christ returns, there will be peace and unity. Bahaullah came, and taught how to establish peace and unity. He revealed a whole new scriptures to be followed. But the majority of people of earth rejected Bahaullah and disobeyed the new teachings. Therefor God change His plan, and posponded it to future.

It is written in the Bible, if God promises to make something good happen, but people disobey God, He will change what He promised and instead gives punishments.
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
InvestigateTruth said:
A new name written on believers, means God shall give a new name to the believers. They won't be called Christian anymore.

Isaiah 62:2. Expressing his zeal for the glory and salvation of Zion, the prophet Isaiah said, "You shall be called by a new name which the mouth of the Lord shall designate" (Isaiah 62:2).



Yes, God said when Christ returns, there will be peace and unity. Bahaullah came, and taught how to establish peace and unity. He revealed a whole new scriptures to be followed. But the majority of people of earth rejected Bahaullah and disobeyed the new teachings. Therefor God change His plan, and posponded it to future.

It is written in the Bible, if God promises to make something good happen, but people disobey God, He will change what He promised and instead gives punishments.
Click to expand...

Jesus brings peace and unity to those who follow them, because He didn't just die that we could go to heaven, but that we could be reconciled to God and come before God here on earth.

Why do you think that the new scriptures of Bahai are not adding to the Bible? The New Testament doesn't add to the Old Testament because the New Testament is the story of Jesus who is mentioned in the Old Testament. The Bible mentions the majority of people rejecting and not following Jesus. I agree that God punishes those who disobey. That's why God allowed Israel to be invaded by other nations in the Old Testament. That's why God used Israel to punish the Caananites.
 
S

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Redemptionsong said:
I believe that scripture has to be brought together to be fully understood. If God is truly the author of the Word, as I believe He is, then there has to be an overarching design to all the prophecies. Many of the same truths are repeated by different prophets in different ways.

Most Jews do not believe in two Messiahs, but they do have difficulty with passages of scripture that indicate the servant nature of the Messiah. For example, Zechariah 9:9 says, 'Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ***, as upon a colt the foal of an ***.' This passage is accepted by most Jews (Talmud, Sanhedrin 98a) as a Messianic prophecy, but it does not sit well with the idea of a King bringing judgment and destruction to the nations opposing Jerusalem. To a Christian reading the New Testament it is colourfully evident because the passage is quoted in connection with the triumphal entry of Christ into Jerusalem [Matthew 21:5].

There is good reason to call Israel the Messiah, for it says in Jeremiah 10:16, 'The portion of Jacob is not like them: for he is the former of all things; and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: The LORD of hosts is his name.'

What tends to be overlooked, however, is the possibility that Israel is both an individual Messiah, the head, and a corporate Messiah, the body. Christians know that Jesus Christ is the head, and that his body, spiritually, is the true Church, the corporate Messiah. In other words, Israel is both a head and a body!
Click to expand...


Do you think those verses refer to Jesus and the church? I believe they do. The Messiah brings peace on earth because Jesus isn't just the Messiah in the sense of being the Redeemer, but Jesus is the Messiah in the sense of being the Mediator between God and people. That verse about Israel being a reference to Jesus and Christians reminds me of Romans 2: 29.
 
InvestigateTruth

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Skywalker said:
Jesus brings peace and unity to those who follow them, because He didn't just die that we could go to heaven, but that we could be reconciled to God and come before God here on earth.

Why do you think that the new scriptures of Bahai are not adding to the Bible? The New Testament doesn't add to the Old Testament because the New Testament is the story of Jesus who is mentioned in the Old Testament. The Bible mentions the majority of people rejecting and not following Jesus. I agree that God punishes those who disobey. That's why God allowed Israel to be invaded by other nations in the Old Testament. That's why God used Israel to punish the Caananites.
Click to expand...
If Jesus story is in Old Testament, in Bahai view, the story of the Bab and Bahaullah are in New Testament and Old Testament.

In Bahai view, Jesus was crucified and died. His soul left this world forever, and is not going to return.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top