• 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!

Does God need excuses?

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Your choice was known before you were born. That means you had no actual freedom to chose some other option.

Answer this: do you have the power and authority over God's knowledge to make a decision that is contrary to what God knows you will do? Can you trick God?
The one and only reason that I will choose to do what God knows I will do is because God knows what I will do.
God does not cause me to do what I will do by knowing what I will do. God just knows what it will be.
If I change my mind and decide to do something different God knows I will do that because God is all-knowing.

Don't feel bad. Not one single atheist has ever understood this even though I have been explaining it to them for over eight years. I don't know why they don't understand. It is either due to stubbornness or inability to think logically.
 
Last edited:

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
That's a very liberal interpretation. It's a weak prediction at face value. He could be talking about volcanos and earthquakes. It's too vague to be useful.
That quote was not intended to be a prediction that was to be used for anything. It was intended to be very general.
If you want predictions, you have to read what Baha'u'llah wrote.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
God knew about hitler but should have created a long lineage of Buddhist monks all over the world to guide human progress, not just India.
That would have brought all scientific progress to a screeching halt. God knew better so He revealed a religion that teaches that both science and religion are necessary for humanity to progress.

“All religions teach that we must do good, that we must be generous, sincere, truthful, law-abiding, and faithful; all this is reasonable, and logically the only way in which humanity can progress.

All religious laws conform to reason, and are suited to the people for whom they are framed, and for the age in which they are to be obeyed..........

Now, all questions of morality contained in the spiritual, immutable law of every religion are logically right. If religion were contrary to logical reason then it would cease to be a religion and be merely a tradition. Religion and science are the two wings upon which man’s intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism...” Paris Talks, pp. 141-143
God created the world that included the Abrahamic religions and all the violence that came with it.
God revealed the Abrahamic religions through the Messengers, but God had no part in what people did in the name of those religion after the religions after were revealed.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Speaking of climate change, yesterday I just heard a scientist on the news say that humans are fully responsible for climate change and that it will require every country in the world "working together" in order to solve the problem if we even can solve it. Thus the predictions of Baha'u'llah, that we will have to come together in unity, are being fulfilled right before our very faces, but only the Baha'is know, as the Guardian once said:

“Dear friends! The powerful operations of this titanic upheaval are comprehensible to none except such as have recognized the claims of both Bahá’u’lláh and the Báb. Their followers know full well whence it comes, and what it will ultimately lead to. Though ignorant of how far it will reach, they clearly recognize its genesis, are aware of its direction, acknowledge its necessity, observe confidently its mysterious processes, ardently pray for the mitigation of its severity, intelligently labor to assuage its fury, and anticipate, with undimmed vision, the consummation of the fears and the hopes it must necessarily engender.”
The Promised Day Is Come, p. 4
Shoghi Effendi expresses this so eloquently. He wasn't just divinely guided, he was a great writer.

I was trying to lead to that very message.

There is not only a need for cooperation on climate change, but also Covid 19, and also nuclear proliferation. That "working together" is not very evident today yet.

Africa has only 1 or 2 percent vaccination because of nations not "working together". We don't realize yet that the welfare of each nation is attained by the welfare of the whole. There is now a rise in cases in Africa now that may develop new variants that our vaccinations don't have much effect on if this is unchecked for too long. We have weak enforcement mechanisms for nuclear proliferation because we don't realize that this is necessary for the welfare of mankind in the long run. The pledges for climate change are voluntarily enacted by each nation, there is no way for the international community to enforce them, and this too will hurt us in the long run. Two problems, thinking short term, and not realizing that the welfare of the whole is also the welfare of each part.

Probably there will be a realization in the 21st century that they must think long term and we must work for the welfare of each nation if we are to have welfare in our nation. It is a selfish reason, but we have to start somewhere.
 
Last edited:

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Since atheists can have moral virtues I don't see any purpose or utility to assign a God to it.


I would be impressed by theists if they get science correct and stop having contempt for the material world. Let's note that it is experts who work in the material science that allow us to live comfortable lives, and saved from diseases. God is what the sciences save us from. What I mean is when there's a cold front in winter and it is 0 degrees in God's creation for days on end it is the sciences that give you a safe environment to live in.

I understand this was a quote, but it makes unrealistic comments for those who live in the real world.
Material advancements are beneficial, but are not sufficient for the advancement of the world, in my opinion. Material advancements can be used for both good and bad reasons. My opinion is that while atheists can have moral values, and often are more moral than religionists are as they are today, a renaissance of the true intent of religion is supposed to be about is needed to avert disaster in the world as it is right now.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Sorry, that is about as clear as mud. For us who are not that well-versed in the Bible, we would have to have it all laid out.
The important part is that six times Baha'is make different events start in 621AD and stop in 1844. They say the event was to last 1260 years. Not one of them did.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
The important part is that six times Baha'is make different events start in 621AD and stop in 1844. They say the event was to last 1260 years. Not one of them did.
Like In said before, that is as

upload_2021-7-18_18-0-44.jpeg
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Like In said before, that is as

View attachment 52805
It's in your own writings, Some Answered Questions. Have you ever read it? 'Cause it doesn't sound like it, because in that book Abdul Baha' "explains" the 11th and 12th chapters of Revelation. And every time he can change something into 1260 years he does. The only reason being is that the start of the Islamic calendar to 1844 is 1260 lunar years. Each time, like I said, it is describing a different event. And none of the events started in 621AD and they didn't end in 1844. Obviously, you don't give a %#^&. But it's your own guy making these claims. Now if you read them and said that his explanations are as clear as mud, then I'd agree with you. But made up, make believe "fulfillments" of prophecies from the book of Revelation is a big strike against the credibility of the Baha'i Faith.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
It's in your own writings, Some Answered Questions. Have you ever read it? 'Cause it doesn't sound like it, because in that book Abdul Baha' "explains" the 11th and 12th chapters of Revelation. And every time he can change something into 1260 years he does. The only reason being is that the start of the Islamic calendar to 1844 is 1260 lunar years. Each time, like I said, it is describing a different event. And none of the events started in 621AD and they didn't end in 1844. Obviously, you don't give a %#^&. But it's your own guy making these claims. Now if you read them and said that his explanations are as clear as mud, then I'd agree with you. But made up, make believe "fulfillments" of prophecies from the book of Revelation is a big strike against the credibility of the Baha'i Faith.
I had a similar thought about some of that.

“And the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months”; that is, the Gentiles will seize and subdue Jerusalem for forty-two months, or 1,260 days, or — each day being equivalent to a year — 1,260 years, which is the duration of the Qur’ánic Dispensation. For according to the text of the Bible each day is a year, as it is said in Ezekiel 4:6: “thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year”.
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, "Some Answered Questions", 11.5

That does look problematic definitely. I do have a logical mind. But you can be too literalistic. He specifies 1260 years as the duration of the Qur'anic dispensation. Does that automatically mean that Jerusalem was conquered at the time of the start of the Qur'anic Dispensation? The others could be looked at similarly, though 'Abdu'l-Baha doesn't mention that 1260 is the duration of that Dispensation.

Sorry, that's the best I can do. Prophecies are not the real bass of proof for the Baha'i Faith. The real proofs lie elsewhere. Prophecies are there to perhaps confirm the faith of someone who is already a believer. They are also there to test humankind, especially those who look at prophecies first. Read the Book of Certitude. It has something to say on that theme. It is interesting, though, that there are 1260 lunar years between 621 and 1844. That does say something if you don't have a disbelieving mind. It is the same with Daniel I have concluded. It has 2300 years from a certain date, 1260 like in Revelations, 1290 that seems to fit well concerning Baha'u'llah. There are details in that can be troubling, I admit. But try to look at the big picture of all of the evidence for the Baha'i Faith in totality. I have failed myself at times to do that in my life as a Baha'i. I have had a skeptical mind.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It's in your own writings, Some Answered Questions. Have you ever read it? 'Cause it doesn't sound like it, because in that book Abdul Baha' "explains" the 11th and 12th chapters of Revelation. And every time he can change something into 1260 years he does. The only reason being is that the start of the Islamic calendar to 1844 is 1260 lunar years. Each time, like I said, it is describing a different event. And none of the events started in 621AD and they didn't end in 1844. Obviously, you don't give a %#^&. But it's your own guy making these claims. Now if you read them and said that his explanations are as clear as mud, then I'd agree with you. But made up, make believe "fulfillments" of prophecies from the book of Revelation is a big strike against the credibility of the Baha'i Faith.
I have read what Abdu'l-Baha wrote but I get lost in it because I do not know the Bible that well.

No, I don't give a %#^& because I do not rely upon prophecies to know who Baha'u'llah was. My fallible calculations are not going to prove that Baha'u'llah was not who He was.

People's fallible interpretations of prophecies is no strike against the Baha'i Faith, except in your mind.
Do you even understand that prophecies can be interpreted in more than one way? And that is the problem. People arrogantly insist they know what they mean so they can support their beliefs. I don't need prophecies to support my beliefs, they are just icing on the cake.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I had a similar thought about some of that.

“And the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months”; that is, the Gentiles will seize and subdue Jerusalem for forty-two months, or 1,260 days, or — each day being equivalent to a year — 1,260 years, which is the duration of the Qur’ánic Dispensation. For according to the text of the Bible each day is a year, as it is said in Ezekiel 4:6: “thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year”.
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, "Some Answered Questions", 11.5

That does look problematic definitely. I do have a logical mind. But you can be too literalistic. He specifies 1260 years as the duration of the Qur'anic dispensation. Does that automatically mean that Jerusalem was conquered at the time of the start of the Qur'anic Dispensation? The others could be looked at similarly, though 'Abdu'l-Baha doesn't mention that 1260 is the duration of that Dispensation.

Sorry, that's the best I can do. Prophecies are not the real bass of proof for the Baha'i Faith. The real proofs lie elsewhere. Prophecies are there to perhaps confirm the faith of someone who is already a believer. They are also there to test humankind, especially those who look at prophecies first. Read the Book of Certitude. It has something to say on that theme. It is interesting, though, that there are 1260 lunar years between 621 and 1844. That does say something if you don't have a disbelieving mind. It is the same with Daniel I have concluded. It has 2300 years from a certain date, 1260 like in Revelations, 1290 that seems to fit well concerning Baha'u'llah. There are details in that can be troubling, I admit. But try to look at the big picture of all of the evidence for the Baha'i Faith in totality. I have failed myself at times to do that in my life as a Baha'i. I have had a skeptical mind.
People who do not want to believe the Baha'i Faith is true will look for any excuse to say it is false, and they will always find a reason. It is a never-ending spiral highway that leads nowhere. I really feel sorry for these people but I cannot do any more than I have been doing and I cannot change their minds when they are dead set.

They won't look at anything but what they want to look at. Baha'u'llah never told us to look at prophecies to determine if His claims are true. Below is what He said. Do you know how many times I have posted that passage on this forum when I was asked for evidence? Do you think anyone bothered to take it seriously? it's their loss, not mine.

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with 106 the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
People who do not want to believe the Baha'i Faith is true will look for any excuse to say it is false, and they will always find a reason. It is a never-ending spiral highway that leads nowhere. I really feel sorry for these people but I cannot do any more than I have been doing and I cannot change their minds when they are dead set.

They won't look at anything but what they want to look at. Baha'u'llah never told us to look at prophecies to determine if His claims are true. Below is what He said. Do you know how many times I have posted that passage on this forum when I was asked for evidence? Do you think anyone bothered to take it seriously? it's their loss, not mine.

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with 106 the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106
Yeah, I know. I've seen you say that quote many times. Unfortunately, most people will look at prophecies first and stop there. The uncle of the Bab knew his Nephew well and could see the signs in Him of who He was, but he couldn't understand how He could be the Qa'im because of prophecies. He was full of doubt until Baha'u'llah set him straight with the Book of Certitude. He was fortunate that He knew the Bab and he also sincerely wanted his doubts dispelled. A little history lesson there.

Good night. You've seen my effort now and now I must go to bed.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Do you even understand that prophecies can be interpreted in more than one way?
Yes, they get interpreted (guessed at) many different ways, which makes them virtually useless... unless they get fulfilled in a more obvious and literal way. But I complain to Christians about how they say Jesus has fulfilled some of the prophecies. In case you don't know, I think the worst is when they take one verse from Isaiah and make about Jesus being born of a virgin. The kid that is talked about by Isaiah does other things, but Christians ignore those other things. So maybe God doesn't need excuses, or "reasons", why he does what he does, but Christians sure do.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I had a similar thought about some of that.

“And the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months”; that is, the Gentiles will seize and subdue Jerusalem for forty-two months, or 1,260 days, or — each day being equivalent to a year — 1,260 years, which is the duration of the Qur’ánic Dispensation. For according to the text of the Bible each day is a year, as it is said in Ezekiel 4:6: “thou shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah forty days: I have appointed thee each day for a year”.
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, "Some Answered Questions", 11.5

That does look problematic definitely. I do have a logical mind. But you can be too literalistic. He specifies 1260 years as the duration of the Qur'anic dispensation. Does that automatically mean that Jerusalem was conquered at the time of the start of the Qur'anic Dispensation? The others could be looked at similarly, though 'Abdu'l-Baha doesn't mention that 1260 is the duration of that Dispensation.

Sorry, that's the best I can do. Prophecies are not the real bass of proof for the Baha'i Faith. The real proofs lie elsewhere. Prophecies are there to perhaps confirm the faith of someone who is already a believer. They are also there to test humankind, especially those who look at prophecies first. Read the Book of Certitude. It has something to say on that theme. It is interesting, though, that there are 1260 lunar years between 621 and 1844. That does say something if you don't have a disbelieving mind. It is the same with Daniel I have concluded. It has 2300 years from a certain date, 1260 like in Revelations, 1290 that seems to fit well concerning Baha'u'llah. There are details in that can be troubling, I admit. But try to look at the big picture of all of the evidence for the Baha'i Faith in totality. I have failed myself at times to do that in my life as a Baha'i. I have had a skeptical mind.
Yes, one time would be okay, but there's six times where things are made into 1260 years. I'll use Christians as an example again... They already believe, so what can they say about taking the one verse in Isaiah and making it about Jesus? But Jesus was not a "sign" for King Ahaz. Jesus did not do the rest of the things that Isaiah mentions would happen. So was there another child in Isaiah's time that fulfilled being the sign? If so, then was he also born of a virgin? Or, if there was no child in Isaiah's time, and the whole thing is about Jesus, then what about all the others things that are prophesied? No Christian ever tries to tie in those things. So yes, I'm skeptical about things Baha'is say have been fulfilled, but also things Christians say have been fulfilled.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yes, they get interpreted (guessed at) many different ways, which makes them virtually useless... unless they get fulfilled in a more obvious and literal way. But I complain to Christians about how they say Jesus has fulfilled some of the prophecies. In case you don't know, I think the worst is when they take one verse from Isaiah and make about Jesus being born of a virgin. The kid that is talked about by Isaiah does other things, but Christians ignore those other things. So maybe God doesn't need excuses, or "reasons", why he does what he does, but Christians sure do.
I know what verses you are referring to, and there is no way that they are about Jesus. A son is given whenever a child is born, so why would that have to refer to Jesus? It says nothing about the Son of God.

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

This prophecy fits Baha'u'llah perfectly. Baha'is believe that Baha’u’llah was the Prince of Peace because world peace will be established during His religious dispensation. Please note that the prophecy does not say when peace will be established, but where it says there shall be no end to the peace that indicates that it won't happen all at once but rather it will unfold gradually. The same is true for the government. It says that there shall be no end to the government which means it will begin and be established gradually and continue to develop over time.
The government will be more developed in the future as the prophecy says (increase in government).

As you know, Baha’u’llah set up a system of government and it has already been established among the Baha’is. The institutions of that government are fully operational, but still in their infancy. What we now refer to as Local Spiritual assemblies (LSAs) and will eventually evolve into what will be called Houses of Justice.

These Isaiah 9:6-7 prophecies cannot refer to Jesus because Jesus disclaimed being the Mighty God when He called Himself “the Son of God” (John 5:18-47) and in those verses Jesus repudiates the charge that He claimed equality with God. Jesus disclaimed being the everlasting Father when He said, “my Father is greater than I” (John 14:28) and Jesus disclaimed being the Prince of Peace when He said, “I came not to send peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34). Jesus disclaimed bearing the government upon His shoulder when He said to “rend onto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's” (Mark 12:17, Matthew 22:21). Jesus disclaimed that He would establish a kingdom where he would rule with judgment and justice forever when He said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).

But Christians can never respond to this when I post it to them. They simply believe it is about Jesus because they want to believe that. Of course they can always say that Jesus will do these things when He returns but they are up against a brick wall again given what Jesus said. If the world will see Jesus no more and He won't be in the world anymore, how can he do any of these things? If Jesus finished His work why would he be coming back to set up a system of government?

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Yes, one time would be okay, but there's six times where things are made into 1260 years. I'll use Christians as an example again... They already believe, so what can they say about taking the one verse in Isaiah and making it about Jesus? But Jesus was not a "sign" for King Ahaz. Jesus did not do the rest of the things that Isaiah mentions would happen. So was there another child in Isaiah's time that fulfilled being the sign? If so, then was he also born of a virgin? Or, if there was no child in Isaiah's time, and the whole thing is about Jesus, then what about all the others things that are prophesied? No Christian ever tries to tie in those things. So yes, I'm skeptical about things Baha'is say have been fulfilled, but also things Christians say have been fulfilled.
I have a theory that perhaps the verse in Isaiah may have been fulfilled twice. In Isaiah's time, and also with the birth of Jesus. In the original Hebrew, the verse meant "young woman", not "virgin". Then it was translated to Greek by some Jews, and the author of Matthew was not being misleading when he said "virgin" because that's the essential meaning it had after it had been translated to Greek. Is the misleading translation providential?

The word of God can definitely have more than one meaning, even if the surrounding verses make it not seem so.

However, I am probably just blowing hot air. ;)

Let me repeat that prophecies are not to be relied on. Let me repeat what @Trailblazer often does:

Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with anyone, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.
Bahá’u’lláh, "Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh", 52.2

You have the capacity to recognize the signs of God.:)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You have the capacity to recognize the signs of God.:)
There is also this passage about having the capacity:

“……. I have perfected in every one of you My creation, so that the excellence of My handiwork may be fully revealed unto men. It follows, therefore, that every man hath been, and will continue to be, able of himself to appreciate the Beauty of God, the Glorified. Had he not been endowed with such a capacity, how could he be called to account for his failure? If, in the Day when all the peoples of the earth will be gathered together, any man should, whilst standing in the presence of God, be asked: “Wherefore hast thou disbelieved in My Beauty and turned away from My Self,” and if such a man should reply and say: “Inasmuch as all men have erred, and none hath been found willing to turn his face to the Truth, I, too, following their example, have grievously failed to recognize the Beauty of the Eternal,” such a plea will, assuredly, be rejected. For the faith of no man can be conditioned by any one except himself.Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 143
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
I know what verses you are referring to, and there is no way that they are about Jesus. A son is given whenever a child is born, so why would that have to refer to Jesus? It says nothing about the Son of God.
No, he's mentioning a kid being born of a virgin.

Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Matthew, "The Gospel of Matthew - ευαγγέλιο του Ματθαίου", 1:22

In context, it appears Isaiah was talking about a child in Isaiah's time. See my discussion with CG Didymus above.

Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD. And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings. The LORD shall bring upon thee, and upon thy people, and upon thy father’s house, days that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed from Judah; even the king of Assyria.
Isaiah, "The Book of Isaiah - Yesha’ayahu - יְשַׁעְיָהוּ", 7:10

Like I said above in the original Hebrew the word meant "young woman" not "virgin".:)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
No, he's mentioning a kid being born of a virgin.

Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Matthew, "The Gospel of Matthew - ευαγγέλιο του Ματθαίου", 1:22

In context, it appears Isaiah was talking about a child in Isaiah's time. See my discussion with CG Didymus above.
In other chapters Isaiah was talking about a child born of a virgin in Isaiah's time but not in chapter 9. There is nothing in Isaiah 9 that says anything about a child being born of a virgin. I just read the whole chapter to make sure. You know as well as I do that Isaiah 9:6-7 cannot be about Jesus because the government will never be upon the shoulders of Jesus. The only way the fist part about the child could be about Jesus is it is was referring to the spirit of Jesus that returned in Baha'u'llah and that's a real stretch. ;)
 
Top