Christianity vs Baha'i

[Dawnofhope]

Yes it may not be needed, that is for sure but interestingly I also found this.

"... The Edict was first publicly commented upon by Reverend Edward Bickersteth in his publication, Practical Guide to the Prophecies in the 1844 edition..."

Ha Ha, it was an 1844 addition, and quoted in the same year. So obviously from a Christian perspective, it was found significant.

Regards Tony

I think the ‘Edict of Toleration’ is an interesting event to consider in this discourse and you’ve probably read the Wikipedia page:

Edict of Toleration (1844) - Wikipedia

Despite being mentioned by two hands of the Cause, Thornton Chase and the Christian source, it isn’t mentioned anywhere in the Baha’i writings. Was this particular Edict ‘the’ event that marked the end of the ‘time of the Gentiles’? Its highly debatable. Its not seen as having any great significance for the Jews not Christians now. However its clearly part of the ‘process’ that led to the end of the Jewish exile and the return to their homeland.

Prophecy is a complex area of discussion that requires sound knowledge of scripture, history and clear reasoning. Amidst strong and controversial statements being made we have exaggerated and implausible claims being made by the Christian evangelicals. If Baha’is can make clear, reasoned statements that are based on known facts, we can contribute greatly by bringing much needed light and clarity.

 

[Trailblazer]

God used the same body of Jesus because there would be no reason for him not to.

How do you know what God did?
How do you know how God reasons?

 

[Skywalker]

How do you know what God did?
How do you know how God reasons?

Everything we see in creation has order and purpose. That's why I believe God used the same body of Jesus. Its akin to me not believing that God reincarnates people.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I think the ‘Edict of Toleration’ is an interesting event to consider in this discourse and you’ve probably read the Wikipedia page:

Edict of Toleration (1844) - Wikipedia

Despite being mentioned by two hands of the Cause, Thornton Chase and the Christian source, it isn’t mentioned anywhere in the Baha’i writings. Was this particular Edict ‘the’ event that marked the end of the ‘time of the Gentiles’? Its highly debatable. Its not seen as having any great significance for the Jews not Christians now. However its clearly part of the ‘process’ that led to the end of the Jewish exile and the return to their homeland.

Prophecy is a complex area of discussion that requires sound knowledge of scripture, history and clear reasoning. Amidst strong and controversial statements being made we have exaggerated and implausible claims being made by the Christian evangelicals. If Baha’is can make clear, reasoned statements that are based on known facts, we can contribute greatly by bringing much needed light and clarity.

Personally I have come to see Prophecy is much like miracles, it really is only accepted by those that embrace the Faith.

I have no doubt that the edict is tied into the event of the Declaration of the Bab, the edict is like the rising sun, the first rays are seen before the brightness is manifest as the sun rises. The Edict of Toleration was needed before other means could be considered, it was the pre dawn light, which fits perfectly with the concept of the Bab's Message as the Gate. The Edict was a gate to future events.

Thus why I see one has to embrace the Faith before they consider how it is connected.

But in saying that, there were people that were not Baha'i that were seeing it did have a significant role in prophecy.

I also see that no one else has to consider it did. Always fun to chat about all this.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Everything we see in creation has order and purpose. That's why I believe God used the same body of Jesus. Its akin to me not believing that God reincarnates people.

You can believe anything you want to believe because you have free will...
I do not believe in reincarnation, that is not a Baha'i belief.
Baha'u'llah was not a reincarnation of Jesus, He was the return of the Christ Spirit and the Holy Spirit.

What Christians simply cannot accept is that God is God and Jesus is Jesus. There is only one God, who revealed all the great religions through His Messengers. Jesus was one such Messenger but not the one and only Messenger of God that ever existed. There have been other Messengers both before and after Jesus, and every one of them was a reflection of God's Will and Purpose. They were all sent by God so to reject any one of them is to reject God's Will and Purpose for humanity.

"Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if ye be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured, moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoever they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possible difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 59-60

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Everything we see in creation has order and purpose. That's why I believe God used the same body of Jesus. Its akin to me not believing that God reincarnates people.

The order and purpose is found in a simple statement made by Jesus.

John 6:63 "The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you--they are full of the Spirit and life."

The Word is all the Attributes. Jesus as Christ is the Word, all the Attibutes.

Thus when Christ the Son is made Manifest as the Glory of God, Baha'u'llah the Father, it is the Word, the Attibutes that return.

There is no reincarnation of a soul or of a flesh body.

Baha'u'llah and Jesus were born men like us, but were Annointed with the Holy Spirit. Their bodies and soul do not return, but the Holy Spirit remains always as our guide.

That is how we are born again, born from the flesh into acceptance of the Holy Spirit, as it is that spirit that gives our soul life and without it we are dead.

Regards Tony

 

[Skywalker]

The order and purpose is found in a simple statement made by Jesus.

John 6:63 "The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you--they are full of the Spirit and life."

The Word is all the Attributes. Jesus as Christ is the Word, all the Attibutes.

Thus when Christ the Son is made Manifest as the Glory of God, Baha'u'llah the Father, it is the Word, the Attibutes that return.

There is no reincarnation of a soul or of a flesh body.

Baha'u'llah and Jesus were born men like us, but were Annointed with the Holy Spirit. Their bodies and soul do not return, but the Holy Spirit remains always as our guide.

That is how we are born again, born from the flesh into acceptance of the Holy Spirit, as it is that spirit that gives our soul life and without it we are dead.

Regards Tony

By that reasoning wouldn't Jesus have the same soul and flesh?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

By that reasoning wouldn't Jesus have the same soul and flesh?

That is a good question, and it has now been explained. The soul and spirit are not part of the flesh body.

I see the spirit as the electricity that fires the neurons in the brain.

If you are interested, here is an explanation.

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

There is one talk before that and at least 4 after that tell us how we connect to Spirit.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Jesus wasn't talking to his disciples about the topic of the second coming in those verses.

I'm sure you have verses that say or at least imply that Jesus is the one coming back. But it doesn't matter. Baha'is don't believe them, or they reinterpret them, or make them symbolic. So my question to Baha'is that use these verses from John, why do you, out of all the other verses in the Bible, why... do you take these so literally? To me everything in the NT implies it is Jesus coming back and that he rose physically from the dead. If that's not true, then the writers of the NT were knowingly lying or they were unknowingly not correct in what they wrote.

 

[CG Didymus]

I see a material explanation on life being more than 100 years is flawed and not based on scientific reasoning.

In the Buddha scriptures it says peoples life span decreases when they do the wrong thing, like this;

"Thus, from the not giving of property to the needy, poverty became rife, from the growth of poverty, the taking of what was not given increased, from the increase of theft, the use of weapons increased, from the increased use of weapons, the taking of life increased--and from the increase in the taking of life, people's life-span decreased, their beauty decreased, and as a result of this decrease of life-span and beauty, the children of those whose life-span had been eighty thousand years lived for only forty thousand."

So obviously it is a spiritual Metaphor and is confirmed in the same scripture, as a person who lives the life of a monk, can live for 100 years

"And what is length of life for a monk? Here, a monk develops the road to power which is concentration of intention accompanied by effort of will, the road to power which is concentration of energy..., the road to power which is concentration of consciousness..., the road to power which is concentration of investigation accompanied by effort of will. By frequently practicing these four roads to power he can, if he wishes, live for a full century, or the remaining part of a century. That is what I call length of life for a monk."

The same is for biblical verses about lifespans.

Regards Tony

And why can't the stories of all those people that lived for hundreds of years be man-made myth?

 

[CG Didymus]

It's not who he was talking to it's the context that matters. The context of that verse wasn't about the second coming it was about Jesus dying.

And in the context of all four gospels, Jesus did come back and showed himself to be alive with many proofs it says. And those verses come after those verses about have not coming back. But, Baha'is don't accept the resurrection verses as being literal. They need the physical body of Jesus dead and buried and gone. And if it is, then Christians have been wrong from the beginning. If Jesus is physically dead they are still in their sin. And maybe that is so, but then Baha'is don't go that far. They still try and make everything about the NT and Jesus true... but only in the way they believe it and interpret it.

 

[CG Didymus]

That is explained in this passage;

John 16:12-14

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

Regards Tony

And you don't accept the Christian answer... that those verses were predicting the Holy Spirit coming at Pentecost. And what kind of word is "howbeit"? KJV isnotthemost uptodate Bible translation. Why do Baha'is use it?

 

[CG Didymus]

Jesus was talking about the Holy Spirit, not himself.

Also...

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you.

What does that mean? That he will come again unto them?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And why can't the stories of all those people that lived for hundreds of years be man-made myth?

Because it has spiritual meaning, which if we find those meanings, it benefits our souls progress in all the worlds of God, which are beyond time.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And you don't accept the Christian answer... that those verses were predicting the Holy Spirit coming at Pentecost. And what kind of word is "howbeit"? KJV isnotthemost uptodate Bible translation. Why do Baha'is use it?

Howbeit means Neverless or Notwithstanding. So nevertheless what happened at Pentecost, the Spirit of Truth will eventually come to guide us unto all truth.

It is just the way we consider the passage, the frame of reference we choose to use.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

To me everything in the NT implies it is Jesus coming back and that he rose physically from the dead. If that's not true, then the writers of the NT were knowingly lying or they were unknowingly not correct in what they wrote.

The NT does imply that Jesus rose from the dead, but it does not imply that Jesus is coming back to earth; it implies the exact opposite:

(John 14:19, John 17:4, John 17:11, John 19:30, John 18:36)

If that's not true, then the writers of the NT were knowingly lying or they were unknowingly not correct in what they wrote.

It does not matter to me even if Jesus rose from the dead because that is insignificant, since a physical body is not important at all, since the body is not who we are. Moreover, even of Jesus rose from the dead, His body would have died after it rose and His soul would be in heaven with God, where it will stay, unless the writers of the NT were knowingly lying or they were unknowingly not correct in what they wrote on the verses above.

Maybe the story of the bodily resurrection is in the NT, but what Christians believe about the significance of the bodily resurrection and what happened after that and what will happen because of it is just Christian doctrines based upon how Christians interpret the Bible, and there is no reason why Baha'is should accept the Christian interpretation.

 

[CG Didymus]

By that reasoning wouldn't Jesus have the same soul and flesh?

Baha'is have their pet verses. This is one of Tony's... the flesh amounts to nothing and Trailblazer's verses about the work of Jesus being finished. Like I say, why do they take these so literal and yet they exclude all the verses that talk about the resurrected Jesus. Those, they say, are metaphorical. And again, only because they need and want a dead and gone Jesus. For them, his body died and only his spirit lived on. It went to heaven. But since it is without its old body, it can't be returning.

Makes perfect sense to them. And it clears the way for their prophet to be the "spiritual" return of Christ. Same light, same spirit as Jesus, just a different body... and returning to Persia not Jerusalem. Bringing a bunch of laws and not saving grace. And not establishing peace but bringing a blue print of how to slowly work toward bringing peace. And not getting rid of evil people and putting an end to the tribulations, but letting evil people continues and more wars and plagues to keep happening and ravaging the Earth.

 

[CG Didymus]

Maybe the story of the bodily resurrection is in the NT, but what Christians believe about the significance of the bodily resurrection is just Christian doctrines based upon how Christians interpret the Bible, and there is no reason why Baha'is should accept the Christian interpretation.

And what is the correct, Baha'i, interpretation? All I ever here is that is didn't really happen... that, scientifically, it is impossible, that Jesus' body is dead? I have never heard one Baha'i say that Jesus rose physically from the dead. One Baha'is said that he believes the disciples took and hid his body. So, since you guys believe you have the real truth, what happened to his physical body? If he is dead, then why aren't the gospel stories just plain old wrong and probably a fabrication? Why does Abdul Baha' go into an elaborate "symbolic" interpretation?

 

[Skywalker]

I'm sure you have verses that say or at least imply that Jesus is the one coming back. But it doesn't matter. Baha'is don't believe them, or they reinterpret them, or make them symbolic. So my question to Baha'is that use these verses from John, why do you, out of all the other verses in the Bible, why... do you take these so literally? To me everything in the NT implies it is Jesus coming back and that he rose physically from the dead. If that's not true, then the writers of the NT were knowingly lying or they were unknowingly not correct in what they wrote.

The New Testament also never implies that another Messiah will come. There is only one Messiah. The Old Testament verses that talk about the Messiah reappearing almost sounds like they are talking about two Messiahs but there is no New Testament equivalent.

 

[CG Didymus]

Hey CG, how’s it all going in California. I hear there’s a lot of COVID 19.

Sorry to cut in but I’m not too sure why the Edict of Toleration is important other than being part of a process that enabled the re-establishment of Israel as the home of the Jews and an independent nation. There’s nothing in the Baha’i writings that specifically mentions it. 1844 was when the Bab declared His mission and also went on pilgrimage. So the most significant event associated with this date was the beginning of a new religious dispensation. The Bab’s mission beginning in 1844 is a verifiable fact. Jesus appearing in the America’s many centuries ago has no evidence whatsoever.

Good for you to stop by. The virus isn't too bad where I'm at. How about in New Zealand? Still under control? The Edict to rebuild Jerusalem is the one I'm talking about. But thanks anyway.