Does the Bible mention Islam?

[TransmutingSoul]

1844 is 1260 on the Islamic calendar. What could be clearer?

The Christian calendar starts from the birth of Christ. The Umayyads came to power 666 years after the birth of Christ.

The day for a year approach is well established in Christianity. 3 1/2 years equals 42 months equals 1260 days.

It’s one of the clearest fulfilment of prophecy know.

It really is the greatest of all signs. How much clearer could it be, is there any clearer prophecy to herald a previous Messenger?

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This merely validates the criticism in previous posts. You admit you follow a specific interpretation post hoc which tailors previous views to match the one you accept.

Thus there is One God with many Messengers or there is not. All original Scripture points to this or it does not.

All I see is the issue, is some claim exclusivity of their Mesenger or Faith.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

It is no one elses except your responsibility to determine what may be true or may be false.

Regards Tony

What? Baha'u'llah has made claims. His son and the Baha'is take on the responsibility of telling others about those claims and coming up with reasoned arguments to defend and support his claims. If I'm interested and listen, and have questions to Baha'is about the claims made by the Baha'i Faith, whose responsibility is it to answer those questions? If the answers aren't all that convincing to me, and I give my reasons for thinking so, who's responsibility is it to give a response to my reasons for not thinking the Baha'i answers are not convincing? If those reasons for questioning the Baha'i answers are never satisfactorily answered, then I'd continue to doubt the validity of the Baha'i Faith... but would still be open for more information that would change my opinion.

So what exactly do you think that I'm doing that is wrong? I'm asking you, the Baha'is, for clarifications about your beliefs, to question your interpretations of beliefs of other religions, and for interpretations of things you claim are prophecies from the Scriptures of other religions. Isn't that taking "responsibility" to not let those making claims about their religion to not get away with claiming things they can't support?

 

[Shad]

Thus there is One God with many Messengers or there is not. All original Scripture points to this or it does not.

All I see is the issue, is some claim exclusivity of their Mesenger or Faith.

Regards Tony

Which you merely have done yourself. Your exclusive view of Islam, Christianity, etc ,etc . Ironic.

 

[CG Didymus]

You would be saying those that accepted a Message all changed the past scriptures to suit that acceptance.

The Jews accuse the Christians, Muslims and Baha'i of changing Scripture. Then the same for Christains and Muslims who do use the same argument. But it was Jesus, Muhammad, Bab and Baha'u'llah that claimed to be the Messengers. They are who they claim to be or not, what they offer us is Truth or it is not.

A Baha'i accepts their explanations and it is only Baha'u'llah that has clearly shown all Messengers are from the same source, that God is One.

I wish you well CG, I will remember you in prayer at the Holy Shrines.

Regards Tony

Along with making the "claim" they are a new messenger from God, is also a message. Are those messages, as we have them today, not some hypothetical "original" message that doesn't exist, but the message of "truth" from each religion, do they contradict each other? If you can't think of any contradictions, let me help you.

Hinduism and Buddhism and other religions believe there are many Gods or no God and believe in reincarnation. Do Baha'is believe that? No. So Baha'is have to make some changes to get those religions to fit into the Baha'i explanation of the truth from God. What are those explanations?

Jews believe the Law was given to them for all their generations. Baha'is can't have that. Baha'is have brought new laws, so what do you tell Jews about why they should not follow their Laws but change and start following Baha'i laws?

Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead in some kind of material way, because they could touch him, because he ate food with them and he told them that he wasn't a ghost but flesh and bone. The Baha'is can't have that. Baha'is have to explain away all the verses that have Jesus coming back to life and appearing to the disciples. How do Baha'is do that?

We've all heard the Baha'i explanations before. Baha'is can't allow contradictory beliefs to be true. They must be explained away to make the Baha'i beliefs the only correct beliefs about God. We all know how Baha'is do this. They'll say that people followed "traditions" that were added in to the religion and weren't in the "original" message from the prophet. They'll say verses were misinterpreted. And the main way the verses were misinterpreted is that something that was "symbolic" was taken literal.

Those answers might satisfy you, but not me. I've still got a lot of questions about those things.

 

[CG Didymus]

CG Didymus said: ↑
All the rest of them depend on Christianity being right or wrong. So it comes down to the last one... what is the truth about the Bible? And I separate the Jewish part from the Christian part.
So is the New Testament the truth? Baha'is contradict the belief of early Christianity. They believed Jesus rose from the dead. If he didn't... The NT is false.
The story about Jesus can't be trusted as being the truth, therefore any beliefs Christians developed from the NT are false.


Isn’t that a false dichotomy?​

​

​

false dichotomy - Wiktionary​

​

Don’t worry, it’s a common enough logical fallacy.​

​

CG Didymus said: ↑
Baha'is are the ones that say those things are not true. But, then after declaring that all those thing are false, Baha'i praise how true the NT is? What is true about it? Nothing.
Jesus didn't do the things that the NT alleges. Who knows what he really said. Did he talk about heaven and hell as real? Or did the writers add those things in to appeal to Pagan beliefs?
Is Jesus the only and perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world? That's what the NT writers say.
Saved by grace, through faith and that not of your own, but it's a gift from God so no man can boast. And that faith is in Jesus being the Son of God and the propitiation for your sins.


So the Bible is either literally true or it’s false? ​

Ok, let's unfalse dichotomise it. Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead. They believe that is what the NT teaches. Baha'is say Jesus didn't physically rise from the dead and that the verses in the NT can't be taken literally. So, if the Baha'is are correct, then the Christian belief about Jesus coming back to life is wrong, right? Or, is that too dichomomised still?

Christians built their doctrines on what is said in the NT. They decided which books got put into the NT. They declared the NT the Word of God. Therefore, it is God's truth and can be trusted as being the truth. You keep pretending that I'm saying that it is either literally true or that the NT is false. No. Christians don't even take it 100% literal. But, they do take the parts that are reporting about the things that Jesus did are literal. Baha'is don't.

Baha'is say that those things couldn't have happened. Things like casting out demons and rising from the dead don't coincide with science, therefore they must be symbolic. So what is the result of making the resurrection not literal? Well, it kind of destroys the foundation of Christianity. All I'm saying is that if the resurrection isn't true, literally, as the Baha'is claim, then the resurrection is a myth. Is there a word that you'd like better than "myth"? Or, does "myth" work for you? How about fiction? If it didn't happen literally, then it is fiction. Would that be accurate in saying that?

I'll get back to you on the rest of your post. Thanks.

 

[CG Didymus]

This merely validates the criticism in previous posts. You admit you follow a specific interpretation post hoc which tailors previous views to match the one you accept.

Tony said, "A Baha'i accepts their explanations and it is only Baha'u'llah that has clearly shown all Messengers are from the same source, that God is One." What does that even mean? A Baha'is accepts "their" explanations? Who? The Christians or Jews or Muslims or those of any other religion? No, they don't accept "their" explanations. They do exactly like you say. They tailor the previous views to "match" the Baha'i view.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Teachings of Baha'u'llah bring unity as He is the Manifestation of God for this day. The Abrahamic lineages affirms this with a clear progression of Divine Revelation through Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and more recently the Bab and Baha'u'llah. The lineage of known Spiritual Teachings through Krishna and Buddha is supportive too though we have no way of being certain exactly what either of them taught. As you find a best fit with the Q-lite teachings for Jesus, a best fit analysis for Buddha will be based on the available Suttas and the Bhagavad Gita for Krishna. These Teachers all accessed the Eternal Dharma and made them known to millions through their Teachings. Anyone can assess the Eternal Dharma to some degree. Only the Manifestations of God have perfected these Teachings in both word and deed. They all have a proven record as Their Teachings have transformed the lives of countless followers throughout the ages.

There are many groups that have obscure and esoteric teachings where a relatively small band of elites claim enlightenment. They claim to have transcended the need for Universal Teachers such as Christ, Muhammad and Buddha. However the historic momentum is with the Universal Teachers outlined whose legacy is undeniable.

But, using Christianity as an example, if the Baha'is are right, when has Christianity ever taught the truth? If the Baha'is are right, any Christian Church that has taught that Jesus rose from the dead, physically, that Satan is real and that God is a trinity, is wrong. And, has been teaching things that are false.

 

[Vinayaka]

But, using Christianity as an example, if the Baha'is are right, when has Christianity ever taught the truth? If the Baha'is are right, any Christian Church that has taught that Jesus rose from the dead, physically, that Satan is real and that God is a trinity, is wrong. And, has been teaching things that are false.

Hard to believe you're still at it. You're a far more patient man than me.

 

[CG Didymus]

1844 is 1260 on the Islamic calendar. What could be clearer?

The Christian calendar starts from the birth of Christ. The Umayyads came to power 666 years after the birth of Christ.

The day for a year approach is well established in Christianity. 3 1/2 years equals 42 months equals 1260 days.

It’s one of the clearest fulfilment of prophecy know.

I haven't gotten to all your references in this post yet, but I saw Tony response to this part of your post and have a comment. And that is, I don't see how the number is a date. It is a "number" or a "mark". If people don't get this mark on their forehead or hand, they can't buy or sell. It sounds very forced to have to add 5 years to a date to get 666. And like you said, the year of the birth of Christ is not known. It is only an estimate. An estimate that you say is 4-6 years. What if 4 years is the correct year that Jesus was born? Then, 4 plus 661 equals 665. So the number of the beast shall be 666 minus 1? And I could come up with an explanation. The Umayyads were probably thinking about taking over the year before they actually took over. So if you take 666 and account for the thought of taken over in the prior year, you get 665.

And, again, about the 1260. Baha'is have to manipulate what the prophecies are saying to make each one fit. The Two Witnesses do their thing for a certain amount of time, then they are killed and lay in the street a certain amount of time. What are those two amounts of time? And, should they be added together? Oh, I just glanced at the verses. They prophecy 1260 days, then are killed, and they lay in the street for 3 1/2 days. So, if a day is a year, then we have they prophesied 1260 years, then were killed. Then, they lay in the street 3 1/2 years.

But that doesn't add up to anything that Baha'is can use. So let's change the 3 1/2 days to years. How many days in 3 1/2 years? 1260 of course. But that is not 365 days in a year. That doesn't work. So let's use 360 days in a year. Now that we have 1260 days, that doesn't mean anything. So, let's change that to 1260 years. Now, we got something. Next, the Two witnesses prophecy 1260 years. They are killed and lay in the street another 1260 years. What? I give up. Let's do the Baha'i thing. Everything adds up to 1260 years. And everything starts with 621AD and goes to 1844. There, plain and day. What could be clearer?

 

[CG Didymus]

Thus there is One God with many Messengers or there is not. All original Scripture points to this or it does not.

All I see is the issue, is some claim exclusivity of their Mesenger or Faith.

Regards Tony

Do you have a copy of the "original" Scriptures that we can check to see if this is true?

 

[Marcion]

You will never convince people with irrational beliefs by using logical arguments.
That goes with religion or with politics, total waste of time and energy.

 

[CG Didymus]

Hard to believe you're still at it. You're a far more patient man than me.

Yes, someone has to keep up the fight for truth, justice and fighting for people's right to party. Or was that Superman and the Beasty Boys? Anyway, I miss you. But, I don't blame you. Who can keep up with all of Adrian's threads. But, I like them. They're all interesting and controversial.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yes, someone has to keep up the fight for truth, justice and fighting for people's right to party. Or was that Superman and the Beasty Boys? Anyway, I miss you. But, I don't blame you. Who can keep up with all of Adrian's threads. But, I like them. They're all interesting and controversial.

I still read them sometimes. But I'm just too practical to get into many discussions. There are better things to do. Most of it, from my POV is just Baha'i propaganda reiterated using different words. We can just go to several Baha'i sites to get that. But good on you. I think OB gave up as well.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

What? Baha'u'llah has made claims. His son and the Baha'is take on the responsibility of telling others about those claims and coming up with reasoned arguments to defend and support his claims. If I'm interested and listen, and have questions to Baha'is about the claims made by the Baha'i Faith, whose responsibility is it to answer those questions? If the answers aren't all that convincing to me, and I give my reasons for thinking so, who's responsibility is it to give a response to my reasons for not thinking the Baha'i answers are not convincing? If those reasons for questioning the Baha'i answers are never satisfactorily answered, then I'd continue to doubt the validity of the Baha'i Faith... but would still be open for more information that would change my opinion.

So what exactly do you think that I'm doing that is wrong? I'm asking you, the Baha'is, for clarifications about your beliefs, to question your interpretations of beliefs of other religions, and for interpretations of things you claim are prophecies from the Scriptures of other religions. Isn't that taking "responsibility" to not let those making claims about their religion to not get away with claiming things they can't support?

CG if this cause is not based in God, which one can prove it is?

My wife read a prayer and asked one question and that was where did the prayer come from. She was a Baha'i after reading one prayer. All the writings make sense to her.

I read a book, that book found a spark in my heart and I started the journey. I found any question I could ask was answered that suited my Logic.

I see the Baha'i have answered all questions. Personally those answers are great for me and I see 1844 1260 so clear and yet you say it is not. 1844 and 1260 are dates from Daniel and Revelation. That 1844 and 1260 are the same year why look beyond that fact?

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So let's use 360 days in a year.

Again the 360 day year is biblical and was used by Biblical Scholars. You could easily find this to be so. It is not a Baha'i invention. Most that has been said about how1844 became the date for some Christians can be found from Christain sources.

What they did not know when doing the calculations is that 1260 was also 1844. Then the Bab and Baha'u'llah gave Messages and that opened doors to new understandings.

Personally I think you like playing with the audience. You enjoy adding to the complexity and playing the good guy to all.

You did ask what I thought you may be doing wrong and that is my observation taken from your replies to both sides. I have also noted you actually like playing the side of rejection best, making it far more complicated than it really is.

So are you playing, or are you really searching?

I wish you always well CG, love to have a cuppa and chat one day in person.

Regards Tony

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

it is only Baha'u'llah that has clearly shown all Messengers are from the same source, that God is One.

Why does this statement sound familiar...

Let me think ...

Let me think ...

Eureka, that is a Muslim belief and you are claiming it is a novel finding of Baha'u'llah.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why does this statement sound familiar...

Let me think ...

Let me think ...

Eureka, that is a Muslim belief and you are claiming it is a novel finding of Baha'u'llah.

Thus you have accepted that Allah spoke through the Bab and Baha'u'llah?

Or is there special conditions you would like to add as to what Muhammad offered?

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Those answers might satisfy you, but not me. I've still got a lot of questions about those things.

All the best CG. I wish you always well.

Regards Tony

 

[spirit_of_dawn]

Thus you have accepted that Allah spoke through the Bab and Baha'u'llah?

Or is there special conditions you would like to add as to what Muhammad offered?

Regards Tony

What the ...?!!!