• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Fulfillment of Prophecy in the New Testament

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I believe that is not true. Our destiny is the New Jerusalem which will descend to earth.
Round and round we go. Baha'is have to change everything to fit their beliefs. I ask them who is the "Lamb"? They don't have an answer. Who is the "Lamb that was slain"? One Baha'is guesses it must be The Bab. Lots of guesses going on. Just like how this thread started. Christians taking "guesses" at what the Jewish Bible said. They found verses to make Jesus born of a virgin, rising from the dead, Satan/Lucifer falling from heaven.

For believers, these things aren't "guesses". They are very plausible interpretations and sometimes believed to be accurate prophecies. But there is always another religion that contradicts those interpretations. Since Baha'is believe they have the latest and greatest message from God, then they believe theirs is the true one. The Jews say Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies that would make him the Messiah. Baha'is come along and also say he didn't fulfill all the necessary prophecies... but their guy did. And that, not only Jesus, but Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah were all "Christs" or "Messiahs". And the Jews missed them all. And the Christians missed all the ones that followed Jesus.

Since all the prophecies are so vague and can be interpreted to mean most anything... and some verses are just plucked out and made into prophecies, then what has been proven? God has intended for "His" truth to be confusing and argued over? Baha'is are supposed to be bringing peace and harmony and to bring the religions together as one. Instead, they are just adding more controversy and things to argue about. There are no definite answers. Only opinions and guesses. And each religion moves on "knowing" they are the ones that are right.
 

Onoma

Active Member
Hard to say really, but I do know that Revelation liberally uses phrasing commonly found in earlier Babylonian texts on mathematical astronomy dealing with Venus and eclipse cycles / conjunctions

Perhaps the problem really lays with modern exegesis and the literalist approach. I can tell you for certain that if you tried to literally interpret any other literature of the Bible's day, like modern people do with the Bible, it would sound nonsensical
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
I believe it is true and valid.

I do not believe Jesus is physically in heaven either; I believe Jesus is in heaven in a spiritual body:

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194

What would Jesus be doing that is more important?
Why do His people need Him here?

I believe that the New Jerusalem has already descended to earth and this is the Day of God.

“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.

In the Book of Isaiah it is written: “Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of His majesty.” No man that meditateth upon this verse can fail to recognize the greatness of this Cause, or doubt the exalted character of this Day—the Day of God Himself.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 12-13[
/QUOTE]

I believe that is not true. There is no such thing as a spiritual body. Jesus Is God in the flesh so He is everywhere just a God is. However the body of Jesus is elsewhere and has not returned to earth yet.

i believe that is meaningless nonsense. For Jesus to return in the body He left in, it has to be a physical body.

He is building a place for us. I think it is highly likely that He means the New Jerusalem since that is going to be a our home for a while.

I believe for the same reason He needs to be here: because we will always want to be with the ones we love.

I don't believe there is any evidence of that but you are welcome to try to provide some. Certainly the writings of the B man that you quoted doesn't have any and then he isn't in touch with the source to know anyway.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
Round and round we go. Baha'is have to change everything to fit their beliefs. I ask them who is the "Lamb"? They don't have an answer. Who is the "Lamb that was slain"? One Baha'is guesses it must be The Bab. Lots of guesses going on. Just like how this thread started. Christians taking "guesses" at what the Jewish Bible said. They found verses to make Jesus born of a virgin, rising from the dead, Satan/Lucifer falling from heaven.

For believers, these things aren't "guesses". They are very plausible interpretations and sometimes believed to be accurate prophecies. But there is always another religion that contradicts those interpretations. Since Baha'is believe they have the latest and greatest message from God, then they believe theirs is the true one. The Jews say Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies that would make him the Messiah. Baha'is come along and also say he didn't fulfill all the necessary prophecies... but their guy did. And that, not only Jesus, but Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah were all "Christs" or "Messiahs". And the Jews missed them all. And the Christians missed all the ones that followed Jesus.

Since all the prophecies are so vague and can be interpreted to mean most anything... and some verses are just plucked out and made into prophecies, then what has been proven? God has intended for "His" truth to be confusing and argued over? Baha'is are supposed to be bringing peace and harmony and to bring the religions together as one. Instead, they are just adding more controversy and things to argue about. There are no definite answers. Only opinions and guesses. And each religion moves on "knowing" they are the ones that are right.

I believe logical deduction is much more than a guess. The attempt by Jews to nay say things is not guesswork either it is intentional opposition to the truth.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
@ Muffled

I believe that is not true. There is no such thing as a spiritual body.

I believe there is such a thing as a spiritual body. Paul referred to spiritual bodies:

I believe that after the physical body dies, the souls of everyone who ever lived go to the spiritual world and take on a spiritual body. When Paul said that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God he meant that only spiritual bodies can enter heaven.

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.


I believe that all humans have a soul that continues to exist forever (is eternal) but that is not to be confused with eternal life, which is a state of the soul that is near to God, meaning that they know and love God.

Jesus Is God in the flesh so He is everywhere just a God is. However the body of Jesus is elsewhere and has not returned to earth yet.

IF Jesus was God in the flesh, Jesus could not be everywhere (omnipresent) just as God is.
IF the body of Jesus is “elsewhere” it has to be “somewhere” so it cannot be omnipresent.

I believe that is meaningless nonsense. For Jesus to return in the body He left in, it has to be a physical body.

Jesus never promised to return to earth. Jesus said His work was finished here and He was no more in the world.

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

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 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.


Jesus never promised to return in the body He left in. That was an assumptions that Christians made based upon these verses from Acts 1.

Acts 1:9-11 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

I believe that the disciples were staring up into the sky as the spirit of Jesus was taken up to heaven out of their sight. The two men dressed in white (angels) came along and asked why they were staring up into the sky because they wondered why the disciples were staring up into the sky. Then the angels told the disciples that the same spirit of Jesus that was taken up to heaven will return just as it went to heaven, in like manner.

The verse does not say that the disciples saw a body go up. It was the Christ Spirit that ascended, not a body, which is why the angels wondered why the disciples were staring into the sky, since there was nothing to look at. That makes perfect sense since angels can see spirits.

Descending from heaven upon the clouds means that the spirit of Jesus, the Christ Spirit, will be made manifest from the heaven of the will of God and will appear in the form of the human temple. Though delivered from the womb of Mary, Jesus in reality descended from the heaven of the will of God. Baha’u’llah descended in like manner, from the heaven of the will of God.

He is building a place for us. I think it is highly likely that He means the New Jerusalem since that is going to be a our home for a while.

I believe for the same reason He needs to be here: because we will always want to be with the ones we love.


I believe that Jesus went to prepare a place in heaven, because that will be our permanent home. The earth is just our temporary home, a place to learn and grow spiritually on order to prepare for heaven. No human body is immortal, but the human soul is immortal, and it will live forever in heaven, where it will take on a new form, a spiritual body.

John 14:2-3 n my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

I don't believe there is any evidence of that but you are welcome to try to provide some. Certainly the writings of the B man that you quoted doesn't have any and then he isn't in touch with the source to know anyway.

The evidence for Baha’u’llah is His own Self (character), His Revelation (His works, which can be seen in the history of His Mission on earth, and His words (words He spoke which later became scriptures or scriptures written by Him in His own pen).

“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 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
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I believe logical deduction is much more than a guess. The attempt by Jews to nay say things is not guesswork either it is intentional opposition to the truth.
And that is the same things Baha'is say about what they are doing. Logically, the Bible stories and Jesus rising from the dead can't be literal, therefore, they are symbolic. With that they can change everything that a Christian believes to be true.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
the parts where he doesn't contradict himself or the law

But you did not say where He contradicts Himself or the law in that quote. Post 997.

Yes, and those people would have been confused considering that he also told them in Matt 23:2, 3
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.
So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.

Was He saying to the people not to obey the Law? No.
Was He saying to be a hypocrite like the religious leaders were? No, He was saying to not do that.
Did He say that the teachers were teaching them not to obey the law? I don't think so. He was saying that they make ways around what God intended,,,,,,,,,but I don't think they were saying that the people had to follow these loop holes and Jesus would not want them to follow the loop holes which circumvented God's Law.

Yes. Telling people to follow their teachers as the teachings are what God gave to learn from is a good thing.
Claiming that what they teach replaces God's law, after telling people to follow what they teach is a contradiction.

As I said above.

And changing the law to claim that it isn't what goes in to the body which is a problem, when the law explicitly says it IS a problem is a contradiction also. That becomes hypocrisy as he attacks the Pharisees for, as he claims, replacing the law with their own traditions, and then he does exactly that. Sorry you can't see it, but it is right there.

The words are there but my understanding is different.
The teachers were teachers of the Law and they added to the Law and made it burdensome for the people, and they misunderstood many things in the Law for their own benefit.
Jesus did not disobey the Law and was in no position at the time He spoke to change it or add to it. Jesus came as a teacher of truth from God and spoke the truth when He said that it is not what goes into our mouth that defiles us, but is what comes from our heart. That is just the truth, but for people under the Covenant of Moses it could be something in their heart which would cause them to eat unclean foods.
Nevertheless it is not something about the food itself which causes uncleanness.
Jesus at the time did not change the law of unclean foods, it was Matthew who put in the comment, years after the introduction of the New Covenant, that Jesus thus declared all foods clean. The Jewish disciples of Jesus certainly would have followed the laws of clean and unclean foods. Peter certainly did in Acts 10.
So anyway, the New Covenant is not Jesus own traditions, it is something God given. The Oral Law is however just man made interpretations of the law.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
But you did not say where He contradicts Himself or the law in that quote. Post 997.
At one point he says that the teachers added or twisted or misinterpreted so people should NOT follow what they teach. Then he says that the people should obey ALL of what they say. That's self contradictory.

The text lists things that cannot be eaten by textual law. Jesus decides that all food can be eaten. That contradicts the law.

So anyway, the New Covenant is not Jesus own traditions, it is something God given. The Oral Law is however just man made interpretations of the law.
So anyway, the Oral Law is not Rabbis' own traditions, it is something God given. The "New Covenant" is however just man made interpretations of the law
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
At one point he says that the teachers added or twisted or misinterpreted so people should NOT follow what they teach. Then he says that the people should obey ALL of what they say. That's self contradictory.

As I think I said, the teachers don't seem to make commands that are contrary to the Law, so obeying them is not breaking the Law. They did make loop holes which were contrary to the intent of God however.

The text lists things that cannot be eaten by textual law. Jesus decides that all food can be eaten. That contradicts the law.

The text does not list unclean foods, Jesus just made the statement that it is not what goes into the body that defiles a person. Then He added and try to understand it. Are you trying to understand it or just wanting to pull Jesus down? Do you see that elements and compounds do not defile someone but the motivations they have do?
As I said, Jesus did not contradict the Law when speaking then. It was Matthew who made the side comment that what Jesus had said was a declaration that all foods were clean. And in the New Covenant that is the case unless of course you think that if you eat something it is wrong.

So anyway, the Oral Law is not Rabbis' own traditions, it is something God given. The "New Covenant" is however just man made interpretations of the law

If you knew who Jesus is you would not be saying such a thing about the New Covenant.
Maybe the Oral Law was meant to be a good adjunct to the Written Law according to those who made it up,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but it did not all turn out that way and should not be seen as God's words.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
He limited the thread, then whoever opened this thread to everybody is partially to blame for rotting it... or wroughting it. Once the rest of us got in here, we took control and it was never the same. Sorry.
I know, I know. I'm just kidding. I was there when it was still limited to Jews and @Rival. I was invited specially. :relieved::D

I'm just kidding
 
Last edited:

rosends

Well-Known Member
As I think I said, the teachers don't seem to make commands that are contrary to the Law, so obeying them is not breaking the Law. They did make loop holes which were contrary to the intent of God however.
The text says to listen to ALL that they say. You are trying to differentiate. The text doesn't. Thus, contradiction.


The text does not list unclean foods,
Sure it does. Start with Lev 11:4. Are you trying to ignore the text?

If you knew who Jesus is you would not be saying such a thing about the New Covenant.
If you knew who Jesus is you would not be saying such a thing about the "New Covenant"

Maybe the "New Covenant" was meant to be a good adjunct to the Written Law according to those who made it up,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but it did not all turn out that way and should not be seen as God's words.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
In this still hypothetical, non-existent thread, it would be up to the person who started it if they wished to make it open for all or only open for some.

I wonder if it is possible to start a thread and invite only ones self.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
Oh come now, it has not been that bad.
Hasn't it? I watched Christians and Jews going in circles and Christians and Baha'is going in circles, and even an 'undecided' going in circles with Christians and Bahai's.
and even after all those circles we all ended up in the same place,,,,,,,,,,,,here, where we started.
Stalemate. Is that good? :)
 
Last edited:
Top