• 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?

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
And you know the problem... each religion says something different about God. And Trinitarian Christians are a perfect example. They say, "Yes, there is One God... in three parts."
The example was to show that just because a religion says they believe in one God, they define God differently.

Actually to say "three parts" is considered a heresy. Each person is considered fully God. The whole doctrine makes no logical sense and they will admit that.

Each person is fully God, with the same nature, substance, and essence, but they are distinct. While their nature and essence is the same, the Son submits to the Father.

And yes i know this is a bad example because God is pure spirit. And God can never die.
And that brings up another question... If God, The Father is Spirit, why does He need another part of the Godhead to also be Spirit, The Holy Spirit? Then, what is Jesus? Also a Spirit but with some kind of body? So what is the need for three separate Spirits? Unless, there is a hierarchy in the spirit world with the Supreme One being at the top, then comes his Son, then comes the Holy Spirit. But even with that, or all of them being equal, how is that different than a polytheistic religion that has one of them being the main God and the others under him?

Then who knows what the Baha'is have. They have God, then all the different but equal special manifestations? Who were spirit being but incarnated into a human body? Yet, God, the greatest of all spirit beings can't incarnate into a human body?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The example was to show that just because a religion says they believe in one God, they define God differently.





And that brings up another question... If God, The Father is Spirit, why does He need another part of the Godhead to also be Spirit, The Holy Spirit? Then, what is Jesus? Also a Spirit but with some kind of body? So what is the need for three separate Spirits? Unless, there is a hierarchy in the spirit world with the Supreme One being at the top, then comes his Son, then comes the Holy Spirit. But even with that, or all of them being equal, how is that different than a polytheistic religion that has one of them being the main God and the others under him?

Then who knows what the Baha'is have. They have God, then all the different but equal special manifestations? Who were spirit being but incarnated into a human body? Yet, God, the greatest of all spirit beings can't incarnate into a human body?

Jesus appeared to Abraham in a body in a theophany. Theophany - Wikipedia

Jesus was among the three visitors who came to Abraham’s tent.

Genesis 18 is an amazing chapter of Scripture. Abraham, the father of what would become the children of Israel, and heir to the promise that his lineage would bring forth the Messiah, met The Lord in person. Prior to this point, Abraham had audible conversations with God, who spoke to the patriarch from Heaven. But in chapter 18, God literally shows up at Abraham’s doorstep:

And the LORD appeared unto [Abraham] in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; And [Abraham] lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, And said, My LORD, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:


Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree: And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said. And Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine meal, knead it, and make cakes upon the hearth. And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetch a calf tender and good, and gave it unto a young man; and he hasted to dress it. And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat. – Genesis 18:1-8.

In verse 3, when Abraham used the phrase “My LORD”, the Hebrew term is Adonnai, which is a title only used for God. So the Bible is clear that not only did Abraham see and speak to God and the two angelic beings present with Him, he ate with them and had his servants clean their feet. So how can we be sure this was God The Son? In addition Jesus’ own testimony that “no man hath seen the Father..”we can also look to the description of Jesus in Scripture. Colossians 2 says of Jesus: “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.” Jesus is the physical form of the triune God.

Hebrews 1 says:

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high: –Hebrews 1:1-3.

God the Father on other hand, is a Spirit: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.“ (John 4:24).

Now contrast that description of God the Father with Jesus’ own description of spirits in general. The Lord Jesus Christ gives an explanation in Luke 24 after His resurrection:

And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them. – Luke 24:36-43.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Jesus appeared to Abraham in a body in a theophany. Theophany - Wikipedia
And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet. And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them. – Luke 24:36-43.
I don't see how Baha'is explain away these verses other than saying that it never happened and was made up by Luke. By what Baha'is have been saying is that after Jesus died, he no longer had a physical body but was only a spirit. This verse contradicts that. You'd think that it is simple, either the Christians are wrong, and therefore the gospels, or the Baha'is are wrong. But Baha'is don't believe they are wrong about anything. Trouble is... they believe the gospels but don't believe some of the things said in the gospels. Things as plainly stated in the gospels as the resurrected Jesus become things that Christians took too literal. Since such a thing as a dead person coming back to life is impossible, which must mean even for God, that those verses can't be taken literal but must have some kind of symbolic meaning.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The example was to show that just because a religion says they believe in one God, they define God differently.





And that brings up another question... If God, The Father is Spirit, why does He need another part of the Godhead to also be Spirit, The Holy Spirit? Then, what is Jesus? Also a Spirit but with some kind of body? So what is the need for three separate Spirits? Unless, there is a hierarchy in the spirit world with the Supreme One being at the top, then comes his Son, then comes the Holy Spirit. But even with that, or all of them being equal, how is that different than a polytheistic religion that has one of them being the main God and the others under him?

Then who knows what the Baha'is have. They have God, then all the different but equal special manifestations? Who were spirit being but incarnated into a human body? Yet, God, the greatest of all spirit beings can't incarnate into a human body?

Jesus as the Son of God is in submission to God the Father. ‘The Father Is Greater Than I’ : Does This Disprove The Trinity? | Reasons for Jesus


What is the meaning of the word greater?
One of the many reasons why skeptics and Unitarians come to this unanimous decision that Christ was merely a human being is largely due to a deep miscomprehension regarding the term greater. These individuals take upon themselves the task of limiting this word to meaning that one lies superior to another in ALL aspects of his being.

However, just to demonstrate that this is NOT the case, let me provide you with a few definitions from the Macmillan dictionary and see if their limiting efforts can stand under scrutiny:

According to the Macmillan dictionary, the word greater means:

  • more than usual
  • important/powerful
  • enthusiastic
  • able to do something well
  • for expressing pleasure
  • (not) good/enjoyable
As you can see, not all definitions point to a superiority in essence. Here are what 11 other dictionaries and lexicons translate the word Jesus used, which in Greek is transliterated as ‘megas’:

great.png


This word can mean “important”, “strong”, and even “large”. We can clearly see why the incarnate Son would use this word in his human state to refer to the Father.

Br. Sam Shamoun, a prominent Christian apologist puts it quite well, stating: “The term greater, not Just in Greek, but also in English, can hold two meanings. 1) being better in essence 2) being better in rank/position. For example, one can say that I am greater than my dog which implies that I am greater than it both in rank and essence. However, one can also say that my boss is greater than me or that the president is greater than the vice president. These do not refer to essence, but in office and rank.”
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I've got another "interpretation" problem. Who is the "prince of this world"?
John 12:31 | View whole chapter | See verse in context
Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.


John 16:11 | View whole chapter | See verse in context
Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.


John 14:30 | View whole chapter | See verse in context
Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.​
All I've ever heard from Christians is that it is Satan. But then I read this from Abdul Baha...
Thou didst ask as to chapter 14, verse 30 of the Gospel of John, where the Lord Christ saith, ‘Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.’ The Prince of this world is the Blessed Beauty; and ‘hath nothing in Me’ signifieth: after Me all will draw grace from Me, but He is independent of Me, and will draw no grace from Me. That is, He is rich beyond any grace of Mine.​
So this verse is made into a prophecy about Baha'u'llah? Just like the "Comforter" a few verses before, Baha'is can make anything fit their beliefs. Besides, since they don't believe in Satan, then this couldn't be about Satan. Oh and here's something that Jesus supposedly said from that same book by Abdul Baha...
One must see in every human being only that which is worthy of praise. When this is done, one can be a friend to the whole human race. If, however, we look at people from the standpoint of their faults, then being a friend to them is a formidable task.​
Yeah, that's a nice thing to do... only see the good in each other. But then he says this...
It happened one day in the time of Christ—may the life of the world be a sacrifice unto Him—that He passed by the dead body of a dog, a carcass reeking, hideous, the limbs rotting away. One of those present said: ‘How foul its stench!’ And another said: ‘How sickening! How loathsome!’ To be brief, each one of them had something to add to the list.
But then Christ Himself spoke, and He told them: ‘Look at that dog’s teeth! How gleaming white!’
The Messiah’s sin-covering gaze did not for a moment dwell upon the repulsiveness of that carrion. The one element of that dead dog’s carcass which was not abomination was the teeth: and Jesus looked upon their brightness.​
Really? A dead, rotting dog had "gleaming" teeth? This does not sound like the Jesus of the NT to me. That Jesus would more likely have brought the dog back to life. Where did Abdul Baha' get such a story? Not only do they reinterpret what is written about Jesus in the NT, they add stories.

Wow, I looked it up and there is such a "tradition". Funny, that tradition is okay, and since quoted by Abdul Baha' must be true, but other traditions about Jesus, like him returning in person, are not. Oh well.

 
Last edited:

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The example was to show that just because a religion says they believe in one God, they define God differently.





And that brings up another question... If God, The Father is Spirit, why does He need another part of the Godhead to also be Spirit, The Holy Spirit? Then, what is Jesus? Also a Spirit but with some kind of body? So what is the need for three separate Spirits? Unless, there is a hierarchy in the spirit world with the Supreme One being at the top, then comes his Son, then comes the Holy Spirit. But even with that, or all of them being equal, how is that different than a polytheistic religion that has one of them being the main God and the others under him?

Then who knows what the Baha'is have. They have God, then all the different but equal special manifestations? Who were spirit being but incarnated into a human body? Yet, God, the greatest of all spirit beings can't incarnate into a human body?

The Holy Spirit leads. The Personality of the Holy Spirit -by R.A Torrey

The personality of the Holy Spirit comes out in the Old Testament as truly as in the New, for we read in Nehemiah 9:20, "You gave your good Spirit to instruct them. You did not withhold your manna from their mouths, and you gave them water for their thirst." Here both intelligence and goodness are ascribed to the Holy Spirit. There are some who tell us that while it is true the personality of the Holy Spirit is found in the New Testament, it is not found in the Old. But it is certainly found in this passage. As a matter of course, the doctrine of the personality of the Holy Spirit is not so fully developed in the Old Testament as in the New. But the doctrine is there.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
The past is gone and it cannot be changed, so the salient question is why Jews do not recognize Jesus now.

It's a logical rational conclusion based on what is written about him in the Gospels and the actions of his followers since his death.
So, again TB, if you were a Jew today, would you accept Jesus? And what would you accept about him? The NT story about him? That he did all those things then rose from the dead? No. What? You'd read what liberal Christians and Baha'is say about him and say, "Aha, that's a Jesus I can accept"? If you were a Jew, why would you think you needed to accept Jesus? What would that add to your beliefs? You'd then do what? Become a Messianic Jew? Would you stop there or continue on your spiritual search and then recognize Muhammad? And eventually Baha'u'llah? And some Jews have done this. But they don't call themselves Jews and they don't follow Judaism... They call themselves Baha'is and follow and practice the Baha'i religion.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
So, again TB, if you were a Jew today, would you accept Jesus? And what would you accept about him? The NT story about him? That he did all those things then rose from the dead? No. What? You'd read what liberal Christians and Baha'is say about him and say, "Aha, that's a Jesus I can accept"? If you were a Jew, why would you think you needed to accept Jesus? What would that add to your beliefs? You'd then do what? Become a Messianic Jew? Would you stop there or continue on your spiritual search and then recognize Muhammad? And eventually Baha'u'llah? And some Jews have done this. But they don't call themselves Jews and they don't follow Judaism... They call themselves Baha'is and follow and practice the Baha'i religion.
If I was a Jew today I would do what Jews do, retain my own beliefs and be satisfied with them. I would not think I need to accept Jesus, unless I was a seeker wanting to know about Jesus. If I was a seeker I would try to determine if Jesus was from God and then I would try to determine if Muhammad and the Bab and Baha'u'llah were from God.

There is no one-size-fits-all as to what religious people do and why they do it as people are individuals and there are many factors that determine what we will do. Not all Jews are the same anymore than all Christians or all Baha'is are the same. Unless we were raised in our religions, we all joined for different reasons. I joined because the Baha'i Faith made sense to me and because I liked the teachings, they rang true, but I still have some problems with it, things I struggle with. But the bottom line for me was that Baha'u'llah was a Manifestation/Messenger of God and spoke for God, all the other things are not that important to me and I can say I just don't know and continue trying to understand. Some things I might never understand, such as how Abdu'l-Baha can be infallible, given he was not a Manifestation of God. I do not believe he was infallible and nobody can make me believe that because it makes no sense at all.
 
Last edited:

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The example was to show that just because a religion says they believe in one God, they define God differently.





And that brings up another question... If God, The Father is Spirit, why does He need another part of the Godhead to also be Spirit, The Holy Spirit? Then, what is Jesus? Also a Spirit but with some kind of body? So what is the need for three separate Spirits? Unless, there is a hierarchy in the spirit world with the Supreme One being at the top, then comes his Son, then comes the Holy Spirit. But even with that, or all of them being equal, how is that different than a polytheistic religion that has one of them being the main God and the others under him?

Then who knows what the Baha'is have. They have God, then all the different but equal special manifestations? Who were spirit being but incarnated into a human body? Yet, God, the greatest of all spirit beings can't incarnate into a human body?

Jesus submitted to God the Father, but he was no less God. Is Christianity Polytheistic?

Jesus himself said, “I and my father are one” (John 10:30). Note that “I” and “my father” reflect two personalities. The verb “are” is plural. And yet, “one” is a singular numeral.

In the Greek Testament the numeral hen (one) is a neuter gender form, suggesting identity of nature. In this sentence, therefore, there is an affirmation of dual personalities sharing an identical nature.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Jesus submitted to God the Father, but he was no less God. Is Christianity Polytheistic?
Actually, with all the problems I have with Baha'i beliefs, with this I can see how what the Baha'is say could be true, almost. A person like Moses, God reveals himself to him... Gives him some divine information and some supernatural powers to do some miracles. Where I disagree with Baha'is, I don't see how Moses has to be a "manifestation"... a perfectly polished mirror. The Bible has him with flaws and making some mistakes. But still, God used him and showed his power through him.

Then Jesus, he was more like the "perfectly polished mirror" and better fits the Baha'is believe of what a manifestation of God should be. He could still be a special creation, perfect and without sin, but not God himself, only a reflection of God... a perfect reflection of God. To us, how would we know the difference. A person like that would be virtually God, able to do miraculous things like healing people, raising the dead and walking on water. But the problem is... Baha'is make Moses, and all the other "manifestations", equal to Jesus. Moses was not a perfect reflection of God. Nobody mistook him for being God. Same with Abraham.

Then the next problem... even though the NT says that Jesus rose from the dead, and that he showed himself to be alive with lots of proofs, Baha'is don't believe it. They say the physical resurrection didn't happen. Well they just took away the greatest miracle of all. Some Baha'is have even taking away some of the healing miracles by saying that Jesus healed the "spiritually" blind and gave the "spiritual" sight. One Baha'i even said that Lazarus was "spiritually" dead and Jesus gave him "spiritual" life.

And that's almost alright with me. But if they are going to deny the things said about Jesus in the NT, I think they should go all the way and say that the gospel writers made most of the Jesus stories up... that those stories are fiction. But Baha'is try to say that no, the stories are true, but in a "symbolic" way. What is that supposed to mean?

But anyway, I'm okay with Jesus being a perfect reflection of God. Which is much easier than believing he is "fully" God and "fully" man... and then that the Holy Spirit is another equal but separate part of God? As I don't see why God, a Spirit, needs to have a separate but equal part of himself that is also Spirit and called the "Holy Spirit". Oh, the other problems with the Baha'i interpretations. I agree with Christians that the Comforter is the Holy Spirit... and that was not a prophecy about the Baha'i prophet. Another problem is that Abdul Baha also makes the "prince of this world" a prophecy about Baha'u'llah? I don't see how anyone cannot see that this is a reference to Satan. But always, the biggest problem is... it sure seems like we are still in or at least heading for the great tribulations that happen before Jesus comes.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
To us, how would we know the difference. A person like that would be virtually God, able to do miraculous things like healing people, raising the dead and walking on water.

That is also explained by Baha'u'llah. All we can know of God is the Messengers. All praise of God is born out of that knowledge, all we can perceive of God, is but what we see in the Messengers.

They are the 'Self of God' amongst us in the Holy Spirt, but they are not the Essence of God as even the Holy Spirit is created of God.

A reflection can never be the Essence, but some see the reflection from the mirror as God and some see the mirror as a reflection of an unknowable God. Some fail to see what is reflected from the mirror.

So as to why God chose to reflect each Messenger or Manifestation in a different light, has been explained in the Kitab-i-Iqan, which to me is a God given explanation.

Regards Tony
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
That is also explained by Baha'u'llah. All we can know of God is the Messengers. All praise of God is born out of that knowledge, all we can perceive of God, is but what we see in the Messengers.

They are the 'Self of God' amongst us in the Holy Spirt, but they are not the Essence of God as even the Holy Spirit is created of God.

A reflection can never be the Essence, but some see the reflection from the mirror as God and some see the mirror as a reflection of an unknowable God. Some fail to see what is reflected from the mirror.

So as to why God chose to reflect each Messenger or Manifestation in a different light, has been explained in the Kitab-i-Iqan, which to me is a God given explanation.

Regards Tony
Of course it is explained. And it makes perfect sense to you. But still, the NT says Jesus rose from the dead. And no matter how you try and explain it, the NT makes it sound like there was a flesh and bone physical body that his followers were seeing and talking to. Made up? A total and complete fabrication? I'd believe that more easily then to believe the Baha'i explanation. Which is what again? That he wasn't there? That those verses have to be taken symbolically?

Oh about "all we can know of God" is the messengers? Which Jew thinks of Abraham or Moses and thinks of God? They were just men. They made mistakes. And if they were "manifestations" then why not the other patriarchs of Judaism? Like David or Jacob/Israel? None of them were perfect and none of them were thought of as being "all we can know of God." Now if we include Jesus or Krishna, and believe the stories about them, then yes, those two were presented in a way to convince people that they were a reflection of God or even God himself. But do we believe the God-like things that Jesus and Krishna did in the stories?

I don't know for sure, but I would think there is a good chance the stories are fictional. And sure, those stories can have some kind of spiritual message or some kind of symbolic meaning, but if they are fictional stories than they are true... they are make believe. So we have make believe stories about a man and then some make him a God, while others deny that he is God, but still make him the next best thing, a manifestation. Still based on fictional stories? And what happens when we take away the miraculous stories about the things Jesus did? He becomes nothing more than an ordinary man. It was the belief in the miracles and that he rose from the dead and is coming back to judge the wicked that made Jesus into what he is today. Christians made him into a God/man that will forgive people of their sins and save them from hell if they only believe in him and follow his commandments. Which were what? Do unto others? That's not an original teaching. Don't lie, cheat or steal... or commit adultery? That's not original. What new teachings did he bring?

Then the reality of it all is that not one Christian can live up to his commandments. So they can't live it. They preach the stories of Jesus as if they are literally true? They interpreted the NT and made Satan and hell very real to the people. They turned Jesus into God. So by the time Christians got finished they came up with a religion that Baha'is say is filled with false doctrines and beliefs. The worst being that they believe that Jesus came back to life, ascended into the sky, and is coming back. And Baha'is say "no", it is not Jesus, the man, that is coming back... It is the "Spirit" of Christ that is coming back. And he has already come.

And for those that don't believe it... it is because they are expecting things to happen that were not to be taken literally. Like literal stars falling? Of course not. That can't be literal. But, what do the Jews expect from their Messiah? Those too can't be taken literally? The government will be on his shoulders? Baha'is keep telling me they don't intend to rule the world. So then the government won't be on Baha'u'llah's shoulders? Then the thing about peace. Is it Baha'is, without ruling, that are going to establish peace? We're heading towards 200 years after the time of Baha'u'llah and things are getting worse... like we're heading towards apocalyptic events. The kind of events foretold that happen prior to the coming of The Messiah. So I don't know. But thanks for your continued input.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Of course it is explained. And it makes perfect sense to you. But still, the NT says Jesus rose from the dead. And no matter how you try and explain it, the NT makes it sound like there was a flesh and bone physical body that his followers were seeing and talking to. Made up? A total and complete fabrication? I'd believe that more easily then to believe the Baha'i explanation. Which is what again? That he wasn't there? That those verses have to be taken symbolically?

Abdul'baha has further explained why spiritual concepts are explained by material Metephor.

I have read and see that Abdul'baha has given a sound logical reply.

If you choose to pursue those answers, then maybe you too can have the outlook I have come to embrace?

Regards Tony
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
We're heading towards 200 years after the time of Baha'u'llah and things are getting worse... like we're heading towards apocalyptic events. The kind of events foretold that happen prior to the coming of The Messiah. So I don't know. But thanks for your continued input.

This is foretold by Baha'u'llah. That the convolutions of a dying old world order will daily increase. Hang on CG, it appears there may be many years of tribulations to face still.

I also offered that I see that Biblical Prophecy is timeless, Shoghi Effendi has also states that certain passages of Biblical Prophecy can still unfold in this age.

Sorry off to work.

Regards Tony
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Of course it is explained. And it makes perfect sense to you. But still, the NT says Jesus rose from the dead. And no matter how you try and explain it, the NT makes it sound like there was a flesh and bone physical body that his followers were seeing and talking to.
Who cares what it says? Any novel can make it sound like what is written really happened. Why should anyone believe it just because it says Jesus rose from the dead and people saw Him?

I do not know how or why those stories ever got written but I know they are fictitious, and that is all I need to know. I get so angry every time I think about the bodily resurrection, as I consider it idiotic to believe such a thing yet millions of people believe it because that is what they were taught by the Church; and the worst part of it is that because they believe Jesus rose from the dead they also believe Jesus is alive in heaven and He is going to come down in the clouds. And because they will wait for Jesus till hell freezes over they will never recognize Baha'u'llah.

I do not care what the Baha'i explanation is, and it does not matter, because I consider those resurrection stories flat out lies that have ruined millions of lives by leading people away from the truth.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Who cares what it says? Any novel can make it sound like what is written really happened. Why should anyone believe it just because it says Jesus rose from the dead and people saw Him?

I do not know how or why those stories ever got written but I know they are fictitious, and that is all I need to know. I get so angry every time I think about the bodily resurrection, as I consider it idiotic to believe such a thing yet millions of people believe it because that is what they were taught by the Church; and the worst part of it is that because they believe Jesus rose from the dead they also believe Jesus is alive in heaven and He is going to come down in the clouds. And because they will wait for Jesus till hell freezes over they will never recognize Baha'u'llah.

I do not care what the Baha'i explanation is, and it does not matter, because I consider those resurrection stories flat out lies that have ruined millions of lives by leading people away from the truth.

Jesus himself said that he would rise from the dead. Islam's Denial of the Death of Jesus Christ

Jesus himself declared that he would be killed (Mt. 16:21) and that his body would be in the grave three days (Mt. 12:40).

The New Testament spokesmen uniformly affirmed that Jesus died. Peter proclaimed this message (Acts 2:23; 3:15; 1 Pet. 1:18-21), as did Stephen (Acts 7:52), Paul (Acts 13:28; 1 Cor. 15:1ff), and others (cf. Rev. 5:9; 11:8; 12:11), etc.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I do not deny that Jesus died on the cross, that is a Baha'i belief.
But it is not a Baha'i belief that Jesus rose from the dead.

Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 and John 2:19 that he would rise from the dead.

For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

John 2:19

Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Jesus said in Matthew 12:40 and John 2:19 that he would rise from the dead.

John 2:19

The Temple here is the Word of God.

Baha'u'llah has offered to all that await a 3rd temple, or the rebuild of a temple.

".... Thus have We built the Temple with the hands of power and might, could ye but know it. This is the Temple promised unto you in the Book. Draw ye nigh unto it. This is that which profiteth you, could ye but comprehend it. Be fair, O peoples of the earth! Which is preferable, this, or a temple which is built of clay? Set your faces towards it. Thus have ye been commanded by God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Follow ye His bidding, and praise ye God, your Lord, for that which He hath bestowed upon you. He, verily, is the Truth. No God is there but He. He revealeth what He pleaseth, through His words “Be and it is”.

The 3 day period is a time of turmoil where the Disciples needed Faith to carry on, the body of Jesus had gone and they needed to find Faith in Spirit to carry on with what Jesus the Christ had instructed them to do.

That is a logical explanation, given by Abdul'baha in the Baha'i Writings.

Regards Tony
 
Top