• 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!

How can the Jew reject, Jesus, Muhammad, Bab and Baha'u'llah?

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
But apparently Jews do not want to discuss or debate about the Bahai Faith.
More nonsense.

I've said that progressive revelation as described by Baha'i is a flawed doctrine as it relates to Jewish people.

First, the revelation is inconsistent. The Christian bible is regressive not progressive by dissolving the covenant between God and the nation of Israel. The Qu'ran says this covenant was never annulled, and then Baha'u'llah claims that parts of our covenant were inded annulled by Jesus.

Second and most important, there is no need for progressive revelation for Jewish people. We do not claim that our Prophets and Judges are infallible, so all that's needed is simple human intellectual and moral advancement. The Baha'i need progressive revelation because they imagine that Moses is infallible. Without this God-like status incorrectly assigned to a prophet, progressive revelation is not needed.

Regarding the claims that Baha'u'llah is the Messiah. I explained that the manner that Baha'i interpret Jewish scripture renders him into an insignificant figure. He was not directly involved in the major Messianic prophecies. The Baha'i principle that Baha'u'llah ushered in an era of world peace which may occur in 1000 years or longer further diminshes the importance of Baha'u'llah as a savior.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Nonsense: I've explained it.

Denial of Baha'u'llah is because he wrote that Israel is satanic. Post #3

How many Manifestations of Holiness, how many Revealers of the light everlasting, have appeared since the time of Moses, and yet Israel, wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings, is still expectant that the idol of her own handiwork will appear with such signs as she herself hath conceived!

(The Kitáb-i-Íqán)
www.bahai.org/r/570360520
Also claiming that any person is God-like and infallible is foolish. No one and nothing is perfect except for God. Attributing this perfection onto the Universal House of Justice is a terrible idea.

Jesus can futher be rejected because no one really knows what Jesus said or did. Going by the story in the Christian bible he was not perfect. There is no reason to believe that he was a flawless messenger of God.

Jesus is God even though the book of Numbers says that God is not a man. The Book of Daniel refers to the Messiah as the son of man. God is not a man = Jesus is not God

This is a response to Ibn Anwar’s argument “God is not a man = Jesus is not God”.1 Ibn Anwar regularly attempts to portray himself as somebody knowledgeable in different languages by trying to comment on various linguistic issues but actually reveals his own lack of understanding of the languages he is commenting on.2 This present article is no exception. Under the (second) title, “A trinity of verses deny God being a man”, Ibn Anwar tries to show from the Hebrew text that certain verses negate the possibility that God can reveal Himself to us in human form. However, before he discusses the texts from the Hebrew Bible, he first selectively quotes from the book of Acts, trying to make his point also from the New Testament that the disciples of Yeshua, particularly Peter, thought that Yeshua was only a man.

The New Tesmanet [sic] describes Jesus as both man and the son of man in many places. Acts 2:22 makes it quite plain that Jesus was a man,

“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.”

Notice that Peter is the one speaking here and he does not use the evangelist script that Jesus is god-man or man-god. Peter merely affirmed our position that Jesus was a man that God chose.

Yes, notice that Peter is the one who is speaking here. So if Peter is good enough to support Ibn Anwar’s theological position on the identity of Yeshua, then the same Peter is just as qualified to undercut his theological position. Ibn Anwar is either ignorant of Peter’s position or is blatantly distorting the view that Peter had of his Savior and Lord. Given the number of quotations in Ibn Anwar’s articles from the Scriptures and his numerous citation of passages from the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible / Old Testament) as well as the New Testament, Ibn Anwar clearly shows familiarity with the text of Scripture and so I have to conclude that Ibn Anwar is deliberately distorting what the disciples of Yeshua really thought of Him. Let’s see what Peter really says about Yeshua in his very next sentences (which Ibn Anwar conveniently left out of his article) and if this really is on par with Islamic theology as Ibn Anwar tries to portray:

Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23 This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. 24 But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

Notice that Ibn Anwar, as a Muslim, cannot believe that Yeshua died and rose from the dead, since the Quran doesn’t allow him to hold that position. (That is, according to the mainstream Islamic position. I think a good case can be made for a death, resurrection and ascension on the basis of Surah 4:157, since the text of the Quran is that vague.) Yet Peter says here that Yeshua died according to God’s purpose and was raised from the dead. This poses a problem for Ibn Anwar’s position already. Either Ibn Anwar doesn’t recognize Peter as a reliable witness, and therefore his own “proof” goes out of the window, or Ibn Anwar does recognize Peter as a reliable witness and thus his position is untenable.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Point of clarification: we didn't have infallible "Messengers" when the Torah was given. They were considered prophets, but were not considered God-like or infallible. This idea of flawless human "Messengers" was invented with Christ, and was expanded by Islam.
This is not my first rodeo, so I am very well aware that what Baha'is call Messengers of God were considered by Jews to be prophets, and they were not considered God-like or infallible, since that is not taught in the Torah.

Also, as I explained to CG Didymus, the Jews of the past were not responsible for knowing about progressive revelation since that is not taught in the Torah. As such, it would be expected that Jews would reject the beliefs of the Christians and the Muslims regarding the 'nature' of Messengers...

What I failed to mention to CG is that the Jews were responsible for recognizing Jesus when He appeared, just as they were responsible for recognizing Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah when they appeared, and that is why Baha'u'llah came down so hard upon the Jews in His Writings.
But if people are not deified, then there is no need for new "Messengers". Simple human intellectual and moral progress is all that's needed.
In case you have not noticed, many people are defiled. Simple human intellectual and moral progress is what is needed, but Baha'is do not believe that just happens on its own, without assistance from God through a Messenger. Moreover, we co not believe that the teachings and laws of the older religions are sufficient to bring about change in the human condition.

That is just your personal opinion that we need no new Messengers, but I do not share it and I do not consider it logical at all. Moreover, I think that the reason that Jews and Christian and Muslims say there is no need for any more Messengers is because that are so 'attached' to their religions and they do not want to relinquish them to a new religion that has a new Messenger.

I could go on and on as to why we need new Messengers in every age and particularly why we needed a new Messenger for this new age, and I could make a logical argument, but I see no point in going there if there is no interest.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It's not a problem for Jewish people. Maybe the problem is just in your imagination.
If it is not a problem for Jews that there is only one true God who revealed all the religions, why don't you believe in any of those religions? Or are you saying that you believe in the one true God but that God is exclusive to Judaism and revealed only the Torah, thus making all the other religions false religions?

You cannot have it both ways. ;)
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
This is not my first rodeo, so I am very well aware that what Baha'is call Messengers of God were considered by Jews to be prophets, and they were not considered God-like or infallible, since that is not taught in the Torah.

Also, as I explained to CG Didymus, the Jews of the past were not responsible for knowing about progressive revelation since that is not taught in the Torah. As such, it would be expected that Jews would reject the beliefs of the Christians and the Muslims regarding the 'nature' of Messengers...

What I failed to mention to CG is that the Jews were responsible for recognizing Jesus when He appeared, just as they were responsible for recognizing Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah when they appeared, and that is why Baha'u'llah came down so hard upon the Jews in His Writings.

In case you have not noticed, many people are defiled. Simple human intellectual and moral progress is what is needed, but Baha'is do not believe that just happens on its own, without assistance from God through a Messenger. Moreover, we co not believe that the teachings and laws of the older religions are sufficient to bring about change in the human condition.

That is just your personal opinion that we need no new Messengers, but I do not share it and I do not consider it logical at all. Moreover, I think that the reason that Jews and Christian and Muslims say there is no need for any more Messengers is because that are so 'attached' to their religions and they do not want to relinquish them to a new religion that has a new Messenger.

I could go on and on as to why we need new Messengers in every age and particularly why we needed a new Messenger for this new age, and I could make a logical argument, but I see no point in going there if there is no interest.

The Jewish beliefs about Satan not being a fallen angel are related to progressive revelation. The Pharisees believed that Satan was the prince of demons, not just an angel God uses to test people.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
Change to dust God O earth products.

Products converted by introduced machine is space caused. React and use the product.

Inventor lying says in mind I invented the state space. Yet infers it to origin space.

God mass now becomes space. Introduced by the inventor.

Origin reason wandering saviour star to release owned stone mass. The sun blasting converter.

Thinker man human scientist.

Two conditions science.

One stone product God O earth completely gone. Meanwhile stone stars put back gas mass itself. Saviour reasoning.

Today think you know what the ancients discussed?

Reason for new reasoning. Humans in that era were not using title Jew.

When nuclear dust temple pyramid sciences caused jewEL nuclear crystalline mass to irradiated burn out of God body. That moment science quantified all humans to by nation be a Jew.

A science occult cause. Reactive philosophy God stone mass

Science did not stop reacting God dusts

Ancient data removed

Scientists star watchers kept records that said God the core heart had not stopped sacrificing life.

The two conditions....life sacrificed in God ear...being the alien nation reasoning universal earth caused.....vacuum activated. Was still recurring.

As prophecised.

False cause prophecy human maths science did it.

Said I will prove human science caused it.

Second recurrence.

Muslim life attacked by God heart released.

Asteroid came.

Documented.

Shroud Turin kept as evidence. For no argument.

Human science lied about what it caused.

Maths human invented said I will prove I caused it by a human applied mathematical future event.

Which occurred.

A God war meant the planet and heavenly body change did it.

Human teaching....ancient sciences activated causes the teaching.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Many parallels between Zoroastrianism and Judaism and Christianity are exagarated. Satan is not depicted as a God in the book of Job either in the Christian or Jewish interpretation. Claims of the Old Testament borrowing from Persian religions are questionable.
That what I remember about Zoroastrianism that there is a good God and an evil one and the good one wins out. Again, something that contradicts Baha'i teaching, but they, no doubt, make it symbolic.

Oh and if there are no "glorified" bodies, then what do Baha'is call the flesh and bone body that Jesus had? Of course, other than saying those verses aren't literal.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Nonsense: I've explained it.

Denial of Baha'u'llah is because he wrote that Israel is satanic. Post #3

How many Manifestations of Holiness, how many Revealers of the light everlasting, have appeared since the time of Moses, and yet Israel, wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings, is still expectant that the idol of her own handiwork will appear with such signs as she herself hath conceived!

(The Kitáb-i-Íqán)
www.bahai.org/r/570360520
No, Baha'u'llah did not say that Israel is satanic, He said that they are wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings because they have rejected all the Messengers of God that came after Moses.
Also claiming that any person is God-like and infallible is foolish. No one and nothing is perfect except for God. Attributing this perfection onto the Universal House of Justice is a terrible idea.
It is foolish to you because you have different beliefs, but that does not mean it is actually foolish, and it does not mean it is not in reality what Messengers are. And that is not an apt description, as there is much more to it, as Messengers have a two-fold nature, one human and one spiritual. Alos, the UHJ is only infallible when they are in session as a body and there is much more to that too.
Jesus can further be rejected because no one really knows what Jesus said or did. Going by the story in the Christian bible he was not perfect. There is no reason to believe that he was a flawless messenger of God.
You are free to reject whatever you want to reject because you have free will. Just bear in mind that I could reject the Torah on the same grounds as you reject the Christian Bible, if I was not a Baha'i.

No, there is no reason to believe that Jesus was a flawless Messenger of God unless you are a Baha'i.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
This is really not all that difficult, but we have covered this ground before. God reveals religions through Messengers but there are two problems: First, regarding the older religions there were never any original scriptures so we cannot know exactly what those Messengers said. Second, the religious followers misinterpret those scriptures, partly because they did not understand them and also because there was never an appointed interpreter of those scriptures.
Yet, Baha'is say great things about the Bible, but, since we don't have an original, we can't know what Jesus really taught. But, we wouldn't know anyway. Jesus didn't write anything, so we are dependent on the gospel writers being truthful. So even with an original, we would still be taking the word of the writer. So why would Baha'is use or trust the Bible for anything? You know like quoting prophecies and saying that Jesus, allegedly, said his work was finished? That's why I complain about Baha'is using and denying the Bible at the same time. Like... "He will come to you from Assyria." Which needs a little work to make Assyria into Persia. Then... "they went to the tomb and it was empty. And suddenly, Jesus appeared." Baha'is say "no" He didn't appear. He didn't have flesh and bone.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
No, progressive revelation is not that simple, and Baha'is do not say that one religion leads to the next in chronological order. Rather . it means humanity is 'progressing', evolving spiritually, over time. I
Well good. But I don't see them evolving spiritually either. That would make Islam and Christianity more "spiritually" progressed than Hindu or Buddhist beliefs and practices? No, Baha'is don't agree with most all beliefs and practices of most all of the older religions.

Yes it is true that the new dispensation abrogates the previous dispensation, but no religion can ever be abrogated, since all revealed religions came from God, so they were all valid for the ages in which they were revealed. Here is the caveat: Prior to the Baha'i Faith, the followers of the older religions had not been told about progressive revelation, thus they did not know about it; so those religious believers were not responsible to recognize the Messenger that came after their Messenger, and the religion that was established in His name.
So they are abrogated... but not really? But within each religion there has been a succession of spiritual teachers, and sometimes religions have had people that even Baha'is call manifestations, moving religious thought forward. And, if Baha'is recognized all the Avatars of Hinduism like they recognize the several people that Baha'is call "manifestations" from Judaism, then in Hinduism we have many Incarnations that brought new teachings. But Baha'is never talk about those people.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Point of clarification: we didn't have infallible "Messengers" when the Torah was given. They were considered prophets, but were not considered God-like or infallible. This idea of flawless human "Messengers" was invented with Christ, and was expanded by Islam.

But if people are not deified, then there is no need for new "Messengers". Simple human intellectual and moral progress is all that's needed.
That's another question I've asked Baha'is. They have Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses all being these "perfectly" polished mirrors... these "manifestations" of God. I have never heard any Jew ever describe any of them as being these "special" creations... the manifestation of God. The strangest one is Adam. He was far from perfect, but Baha'is don't believe anything about what the Bible story says about him. Maybe, they use some Islamic stories about him, I not sure.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
That what I remember about Zoroastrianism that there is a good God and an evil one and the good one wins out. Again, something that contradicts Baha'i teaching, but they, no doubt, make it symbolic.

Oh and if there are no "glorified" bodies, then what do Baha'is call the flesh and bone body that Jesus had? Of course, other than saying those verses aren't literal.

Jesus and Zoraster are very different. The claims of Zoraster being born of a virgin are embellished. The Immaculate conception doctrine is not in the Bible.

Zoroaster was born of a virgin and “immaculate conception by a ray of divine reason.”It’s hard to quantify this one — the Avesta (note again, a late source, later than Christianity) refers to a “kingly glory” that was handed onward from one ruler to the next; this glory resided in Zoroaster’s mother for about 15 years, including during the time she was married to Zoroaster’s dad, Pourushaspa. It seems that a human father was still needed for Zoroaster [Jack.ZP, 18, 24] and that this “ray” was merely for the infusion of Zoroaster’s spirit, not his body.(A reader has added the point that it is not correct to use “Immaculate conception” to refer to Christ’s virgin birth, as seems to be the implication here; rather it refers to the Roman Catholic doctrine that the Mary was born without original sin. It is only somewhat recently that some people have erroneously used it to refer to Christ’s virgin birth.)
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
they see they cannot win the debate
Who can win a debate with a Baha'i? If I say the Bible says such and such, Baha'is say that is metaphorical. If they tell you the Holy Spirit is the Comforter you tell them no, they have misinterpreted what it says. But wait, I thought you said you don't debate?
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Jesus never said that. The Gospel authors wrote stories that say that Jesus said that. It's laughable that anyone would believe those words came from Jesus because that is logically impossible..
So those doggone Gospel writers making things up. So the NT is not to be trusted? Then what about when a Gospel writer wrote about Jesus saying that his work was finished?

So "logically" God could not have brought Jesus back to life? And that is so "laughable" that people today, and all the way back 2000 years ago, would believe such a thing? So that's only a superstitious belief? Here we go again. Baha'is, although they won't admit it, do not believe in Christianity. They think it a a religion filled with false beliefs and doctrines, right? No, of course not. You believe it is a true, revealed religion from God.... originally. So again, I'll ask... why in this day and age would a Jew give up their religion to become a Christian? Baha'is don't even believe in what today's Christians believe and teach.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Jesus and Zoraster are very different. The claims of Zoraster being born of a virgin are embellished. The Immaculate conception doctrine is not in the Bible.
I doubt Baha'is believe any of that. Yet, they say Zoroastrianism is a true religion of God. But like so many of the others the "original" teachings or lost and forgotten.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
What I failed to mention to CG is that the Jews were responsible for recognizing Jesus when He appeared, just as they were responsible for recognizing Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah when they appeared, and that is why Baha'u'llah came down so hard upon the Jews in His Writings.
Nope. Our responsibility is to deny false prophets as defined by Deuteronomy 13. But you'll need to read it from a Jewish source. The Christian bible obscures the prohibition from adding or removing from the commandments.
In case you have not noticed, many people are defiled.
It is prohibited to deify people in Judaism. That is idolatry.
Simple human intellectual and moral progress is what is needed, but Baha'is do not believe that just happens on its own, without assistance from God through a Messenger. Moreover, we co not believe that the teachings and laws of the older religions are sufficient to bring about change in the human condition.
Your beliefs are irrelevent in a debate. It's just more preaching.
That is just your personal opinion that we need no new Messengers, but I do not share it and I do not consider it logical at all. Moreover, I think that the reason that Jews and Christian and Muslims say there is no need for any more Messengers is because that are so 'attached' to their religions and they do not want to relinquish them to a new religion that has a new Messenger.
Your opinion about Jews and Christians and Muslims is bigoted. We don't need your religion. It's that simple. You are imagining flaws and assigning them to the entire group unjustly, demonizing those who don't agree with you. That's bigoted.

Bigot - one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.​

I could go on and on as to why we need new Messengers in every age and particularly why we needed a new Messenger for this new age, and I could make a logical argument, but I see no point in going there if there is no interest.
Nah. I don't think you can make a logical argument showing the need for a new messenger. So far it sounds completely irrational. It's faith based, not evidence based.
If it is not a problem for Jews that there is only one true God who revealed all the religions, why don't you believe in any of those religions? Or are you saying that you believe in the one true God but that God is exclusive to Judaism and revealed only the Torah, thus making all the other religions false religions?

You cannot have it both ways. ;)
Wrong. It's not a binary choice. You can have your religion with your God. I can have my religion with my God. The Torah clearly says that there are "other Gods". Jewish people are simply prohibited from worshipping or serving those other Gods.
No, Baha'u'llah did not say that Israel is satanic, He said that they are wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings because they have rejected all the Messengers of God that came after Moses.
And that is a very good reason to reject him. Case closed. He sounds like a bigot. Not very enlightened.
It is foolish to you because you have different beliefs, but that does not mean it is actually foolish, and it does not mean it is not in reality what Messengers are. And that is not an apt description, as there is much more to it, as Messengers have a two-fold nature, one human and one spiritual. Alos, the UHJ is only infallible when they are in session as a body and there is much more to that too.
It is foolish to believe that any individual is flawless. And then to transfer that to all descions of an elected body is even worse. It is a terrible idea for a modern Justice system.
You are free to reject whatever you want to reject because you have free will. Just bear in mind that I could reject the Torah on the same grounds as you reject the Christian Bible, if I was not a Baha'i.

No, there is no reason to believe that Jesus was a flawless Messenger of God unless you are a Baha'i.
That's a strawman. No one is asking you to accept Torah. You on the other hand are asking all religious believers to accept all religions.
Only now that we have been told about progressive revelation are religious believers obligated to accept all the religions that were revealed by the one true God. But the problem is that even when they are told that there is only one true God who revealed all the religions, most people STILL reject that teaching and cling to their older religion.

According to your words above you think "all religious believers are obligated to accept all religions". That is elitest, judgemental, know-it-all, preachy garbage.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said: But apparently Jews do not want to discuss or debate about the Bahai Faith.

More nonsense.

I've said that progressive revelation as described by Baha'i is a flawed doctrine as it relates to Jewish people.
That is not a discussion, it is your personal opinion. A discussion would be a back and forth dialogue, including why you consider Baha'i is a flawed doctrine as it relates to Jewish people.
First, the revelation is inconsistent. The Christian bible is regressive not progressive by dissolving the covenant between God and the nation of Israel. The Qu'ran says this covenant was never annulled, and then Baha'u'llah claims that parts of our covenant were indeed annulled by Jesus.
All of these are more personal opinions, not facts. When you say "the Christian bible is regressive not progressive by dissolving the covenant between God and the nation of Israel" that is a personal opinion and it is based upon your religious beliefs that the Jews had the only and last revelation from God through Moses, so no Covenant could ever supersede the Mosaic Covenant. However, the Baha'i Faith cleared up what Christians might have gotten wrong because we believe the Mosaic Covenant is everlasting.

Baha’is believe that there is an everlasting covenant which remains in force today.

The overall covenant God made with His followers in Judaism, known to Jews as the Mosaic Covenant, and to Christians as the Old Covenant, put forth the stipulation of the oneness of God – “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:2) – as the primary law of the Ten Commandments. In exchange for following those principles, God promised that he would never leave His followers without guidance:

Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid … for the Lord thy God, he it is that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee. – Deuteronomy 31:6.

This eternal covenant between God and humanity, the Baha’i teachings say, remains in force today. The Creator has bestowed bounties on us all, and in return asks us to recognize His prophets and messengers and abide by their laws and spiritual principles. The Baha’i teachings joyously celebrate that covenant:

How to Understand the Baha’i Covenant

However, there is another kind of Covenant that is made between a Messenger of God and His followers and that Covenant is renewed in every age, so the Christians are under both those Covenants. So, there is the everlasting Covenant and there are also Greater and Lesser Covenants, as is explained on wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant of Baháʼu'lláh
Second and most important, there is no need for progressive revelation for Jewish people. We do not claim that our Prophets and Judges are infallible, so all that's needed is simple human intellectual and moral advancement. The Baha'i need progressive revelation because they imagine that Moses is infallible. Without this God-like status incorrectly assigned to a prophet, progressive revelation is not needed.
No, you are wrong about that. The Baha'is do not believe in progressive revelation because we imagine that Moses was infallible. We believe we need it because humanity needs continuing guidance from God through His Messengers. Social teachings and laws need to be updated from age to age and a new message from God is needed, because the world and humans change over time. The message for this age is unity of mankind, the oneness of God and the oneness of religion, but that cannot happen as long as people cling to their older religions.
Regarding the claims that Baha'u'llah is the Messiah. I explained that the manner that Baha'i interpret Jewish scripture renders him into an insignificant figure. He was not directly involved in the major Messianic prophecies. The Baha'i principle that Baha'u'llah ushered in an era of world peace which may occur in 1000 years or longer further diminshes the importance of Baha'u'llah as a savior.
Baha'u'llah was not is not directly involved in the fulfillment of the major Messianic prophecies but the problem that you and all other Jews have is showing where any verses in your scriptures say that the Messiah will be directly involved. That is only an assumption unless you have scriptures that say that.

At the end of the day, it is still a matter of how those prophecies are interpreted, what they are interpreted to mean, and your interpretation is no better than any other. Moreover, Jews do not only have a problem with the Baha'i version of the Messiah, they also have a problem with the Christian version. Moreover, I could look at the Messianic prophecies of other religions and they would not have the Messiah doing what Jews expect him to do, so something is bad at black rock, because there is only one Messiah and he would have to fulfill the prophecies of all the world religions, not just one religion.

Prophecies from World Religion and other sources

Prophecy Fulfilled Webpage
.
Baha'is do not believe that Baha'u'llah was a Savior as Jews and Christians believe the Messiah will be, a magic man who come and fix everything as soon as he arrives or at least withing his lifetime. the Messianic prophecies will be fulfilled as the result of the coming of Baha'u'llah, but the changes will come about from the actions of people who follow the teachings if Baha'u'llah, whether they ever heard of Him or not. In case you have not noticed, this is already happening all over the world. The call for unity in the United States is no accident, as it is the Will of God and it is embedded in the Writings of Baha'u'llah.

“My object is none other than the betterment of the world and the tranquillity of its peoples. The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 286
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I doubt Baha'is believe any of that. Yet, they say Zoroastrianism is a true religion of God. But like so many of the others the "original" teachings or lost and forgotten.
No, we do not believe any of that because that is not what Zoroaster revealed, it is just some human interpretation of what He revealed.

The Jews and the Christians can try to use that against the Baha'i Faith, but it won't work, because we have a logical explanation for everything, an explanation they do not want to look at because it would mean that their religion is not the only true religion of God, a belief that is utterly illogical, since no loving and just God would favor one religion over another and deem all the other religions in the world false. They cannot make that work logically no matter how hard they try, all they can do is "believe."

Below is the logical explanation as to why all the religions "seem to" contradict each other. It is because that have been corrupted by men.

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when 172 the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 171-172
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I doubt Baha'is believe any of that. Yet, they say Zoroastrianism is a true religion of God. But like so many of the others the "original" teachings or lost and forgotten.

The teachings of Zoroastrianism don't support that Jesus was copied from Zoraster. Zoraster was never baptized in a river. Jesus never received revelation from an archangel. Jesus Vs Zoroaster – Debunking The Alleged Parallels | Reasons for Jesus

2. He was baptized in a river. I can find no reference to this at all. There is a story of Zoraster receiving a revelation from an archangel while on the banks of a river, which Zoroaster later crosses [Jack.ZP, 41], but that is as close as I have found.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yet, Baha'is say great things about the Bible, but, since we don't have an original, we can't know what Jesus really taught. But, we wouldn't know anyway. Jesus didn't write anything, so we are dependent on the gospel writers being truthful. So even with an original, we would still be taking the word of the writer.
You already know what the Baha'i view of the Bible is so I have to wonder why you keep bringing it up:

The Bahá'í viewpoint proposed by this essay has been established as follows: The Bible is a reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book. However, as a collection of the writings of independent and human authors, it is not necessarily historically accurate. Nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God' in the way the original words of Moses and Jesus could have been. Instead there is an area of continuing interest for Bahá'í scholars, possibly involving the creation of new categories for defining authoritative religious literature.

A Baháí View of the Bible
(Rosebery, Australia: Association for Baha'i Studies Australia, 1996)

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet....

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
(From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice)
So why would Baha'is use or trust the Bible for anything? You know like quoting prophecies and saying that Jesus, allegedly, said his work was finished?
Simply put, I quote the Bible only because I am engaged in a dialogue with a Christian who believes in the Bible, or you engage me in a dialogue about the Bible. If you drop it and no Christians posts to me you won't see me referring to the Bible.
That's why I complain about Baha'is using and denying the Bible at the same time. Like... "He will come to you from Assyria." Which needs a little work to make Assyria into Persia. Then... "they went to the tomb and it was empty. And suddenly, Jesus appeared." Baha'is say "no" He didn't appear. He didn't have flesh and bone.
It needs no work at all, but we have been over this ground before and I have no desire to go over it again.
How many more years are you going to cover the same ground, till all the Baha'is leave this forum?

Nothing needs any work at all because Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies for the coming of the Messiah and the other prophecies are about what will happen during the Messianic Age as the result of His coming and revealing what we need to know to bring the prophecies to fruition.
 
Last edited:
Top