If Quran claimed Mohammad (s) is "son" of Jesus (a).

[Link]

Background to the question. Baha'allah claims to be the metaphoric son of Hassan Al-Askari (a). I'm making an analogy, can Mohammad (s) claim to be son of Jesus (a) and even linked to David (a) by being metaphoric son of Jesus (a) and descendant of David (a) from this angle? Say he argued he was a descendant of David (A) on this ground, would it make sense to you guys?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Spiritually all the Prophets of God are one.

“As to the matter of names, Muhammad, Himself, declared:
“I am Jesus.” He recognized the truth of the signs,
prophecies, and words of Jesus, and testified that they were all of God. In
this sense, neither the person of Jesus nor His writings hath differed from
that of Muhammad and of His holy Book, inasmuch as both have championed the
Cause of God, uttered His praise, and revealed His commandments.”

Excerpt from
The Kitáb-i-Íqán
Bahá’u’lláh

 

[Link]

Spiritually all the Prophets of God are one.

“As to the matter of names, Muhammad, Himself, declared:
“I am Jesus.” He recognized the truth of the signs,
prophecies, and words of Jesus, and testified that they were all of God. In
this sense, neither the person of Jesus nor His writings hath differed from
that of Muhammad and of His holy Book, inasmuch as both have championed the
Cause of God, uttered His praise, and revealed His commandments.”

Excerpt from
The Kitáb-i-Íqán
Bahá’u’lláh

This seems to be an overplay to try justify the verse of sealing Nabis. This is problematic in that, you can always twist what God says by playing these language games.

 

[loverofhumanity]

This seems to be an overplay to try justify the verse of sealing Nabis. This is problematic in that, you can always twist what God says by playing these language games.

However, if Baha’u’llah’s Words are the Word of God then it is neither a play on words nor twisted, but the truth. Both you and I know that Muhammad is God’s Messenger. But what about the billions of Christians who rejected Him and deprived themselves of Islam? They have all dismissed so confidently Prophet Muhammad even though He was clearly foretold in the Bible.

Today, Baha’u’llah has come and once again we are faced with the same temptation as people of the past to dismiss Him. It is in our best interests I believe not to hastily rush to judgement as people in the past did.

 

[Link]

However, if Baha’u’llah’s Words are the Word of God then it is neither a play on words nor twisted, but the truth. Both you and I know that Muhammad is God’s Messenger. But what about the billions of Christians who rejected Him and deprived themselves of Islam? They have all dismissed so confidently Prophet Muhammad even though He was clearly foretold in the Bible.

Today, Baha’u’llah has come and once again we are faced with the same temptation as people of the past to dismiss Him. It is in our best interests I believe not to hastily rush to judgement as people in the past did.

This is circular reasoning. His conjecture about language and his misuse of it is good proof he is not a Messenger of God.

 

[loverofhumanity]

This is circular reasoning. His conjecture about language and his misuse of it is good proof he is not a Messenger of God.

That is no proof for the language of the Torah, Gospels and Quran are also very different from one another. That does not mean Moses and Jesus were not Messengers from God.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Background to the question. Baha'allah claims to be the metaphoric son of Hassan Al-Askari (a). I'm making an analogy, can Mohammad (s) claim to be son of Jesus (a) and even linked to David (a) by being metaphoric son of Jesus (a) and descendant of David (a) from this angle? Say he argued he was a descendant of David (A) on this ground, would it make sense to you guys?

Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, `You must be born again. '"

Metaphorically, Islam was pregnant with a Promised One.

"This child (the Bab) was the promised Manifestation, Who is the offspring of the religion of Muḥammad."

Search – Authoritative Writings and Guidance | Bahá’í Reference Library

www.bahai.org

 

[loverofhumanity]

Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, `You must be born again. '"

Metaphorically, Islam was pregnant with a Promised One.

"This child (the Bab) was the promised Manifestation, Who is the offspring of the religion of Muḥammad."

Search – Authoritative Writings and Guidance | Bahá’í Reference Library

www.bahai.org

“The Umayyads
were ever anxious to lay hold on the Promised One Who was to appear from the
lineage of Muḥammad, that they might destroy and annihilate Him, for they
greatly feared His advent. And so wherever they found a descendant of Muḥammad
who was respected in the eyes of the people, they killed him.

“And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a
rod of iron.”
This glorious son is the promised Manifestation, Who was born of the religion
of God and reared in the bosom of the divine teachings. The iron rod is a
symbol of might and power—it is not a sword—and means that He will shepherd all
the nations of the earth by virtue of His divine might and power. And by this
son is meant the Báb.”

Excerpt from
Some Answered Questions
‘Abdu’l‑Bahá

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This is circular reasoning. His conjecture about language and his misuse of it is good proof he is not a Messenger of God.

Every Messenger of God has the same accusations given against them.

This is because their person and their life is the greatest proof of God and the given Message.

After they pass on, the greatest proof that remains for all of humanity, is the Book.

The Bible remains as a sure guide. The Koran remains as 100% valid proof. The Baha'i Writings from the Bab, Baha’u’llah, Abdul'baha and Shoghi Effendi also 100% Validated.

Other scriptures will vary in accuracy, with some, little of the original remains.

Regards Tony

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Every Messenger of God has the same accusations given against them.

This is because their person and their life is the greatest proof of God and the given Message.

After they pass on, the greatest proof that remains for all of humanity, is the Book.

The Bible remains as a sure guide. The Koran remains as 100% valid proof. The Baha'i Writings from the Bab, Baha’u’llah, Abdul'baha and Shoghi Effendi also 100% Validated.

Other scriptures will vary in accuracy, with some, little of the original remains.

Regards Tony

Yes, exactly, and I like to add that, one of the reasons the Jews had rejected Jesus, was, that Jesus is not from Lineage of David, whereas, Messiah is supposed to be so.

 

[Link]

The Baha'i Writings from the Bab, Baha’u’llah, Abdul'baha and Shoghi Effendi also 100% Validated.

There are other scriptures after Baha'allah like the Maitreya's, you don't accept them. You come up with reasons just as I do for not accepting your scriptures.

 

[PureX]

In a culture that was primarily based on clan patriarchy, to be the son of a clan's patriarch meant that one would be taken by the rest of that society as a legal, binding proxy for the patriarch. The son would be understood to be an extension of the clan patriarch's will and authority.

And this familial, patriarchal line of authority also permeated other leadership structures, like a Rabi and his proteges. Or a scribe and his students. And it was commonplace, then for these proteges to write or speak of act on behalf of their patriarch and to do so 'in his name'.

So being labeled as, or labeling oneself as "the son of ...." was very commonplace among those who felt they were representatives of the person that claim to be the "son of". It's why when Jesus was claimed to have been the "son of God" it was a shocking statement, akin to blasphemy. Because it meant that he was claiming to speak with God's own authority. And that every word he uttered should be taken as though it came from God, himself.

Lineage was considered ideological as well as genetic.

 

[Link]

Every Messenger of God has the same accusations given against them.

Same accusations Bahais do to the Maitreya.

 

[Link]

In a culture that was primarily based on clan patriarchy, to be the son of a clan's patriarch meant that one would be taken by the rest of that society as a legal, binding proxy for the patriarch. The son would be understood to be an extension of the clan patriarch's will and authority.

And this familial, patriarchal line of authority also permeated other leadership structures, like a Rabi and his proteges. Or a scribe and his students. And it was commonplace, then for these proteges to write or speak of act on behalf of their patriarch and to do so 'in his name'.

So being labeled as, or labeling oneself as "the son of ...." was very commonplace among those who felt they were representatives of the person that claim to be the "son of". It's why when Jesus was claimed to have been the "son of God" it was a shocking statement, akin to blasphemy. Because it meant that he was claiming to speak with God's own authority. And that every word he uttered should be taken as though it came from God, himself.

Lineage was considered ideological as well as genetic.

This is a fair point. I would say, the context determines it. The hadiths about the Mahdi being son of Hassan Al-Askari are in all context of Hassan Al-Askari is son of Ali Al-Hadi and he being son of Mohammad Al-Jewad, so and so forth. So the context of "son" should be interpreted by the other 11 mentions of "son of" in the hadiths.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Same accusations Bahais do to the Maitreya.

I have no accusations about the Maitreya, I am not aware of any Baha'i that had any accusations in that regard.

Regards Tony

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Same accusations Bahais do to the Maitreya.

The difference is, in Islam it was Promised that after 1000 years, the Promised ones come, so, they came and we believed, but in Bahai Scriptures this Maitreya is not promised to come. There will be future Prophets, but the the time of their Manifestations has not come yet.

 

[Link]

The difference is, in Islam it was Promised that after 1000 years, the Promised ones come, so, they came and we believed, but in Bahai Scriptures this Maitreya is not promised to come. There will be future Prophets, but the the time of their Manifestations has not come yet.

He has interpretation to that, you don't accept it.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

He has interpretation to that, you don't accept it.

He did not establish any Faith. So, what is it to accept? Did he say a new Book is revealed to follow? Does he have new commands, Laws from God?
The Imams had said, Qaim brings a new Book, and a New Law. Meaning new commands come from God. That is the difference. And we already looked into his claim. He said he used to be an Atheist. Prophets could never be atheists at anytime. From childhood they know all things. Like Jesus who, when He was a toddler, He was speaking of the Day of Judgement.

 

[Link]

He did not establish any Faith. So, what is it to accept? Did he say a new Book is revealed to follow? Does he have new commands, Laws from God?
The Imams had said, Qaim brings a new Book, and a New Law. Meaning new commands come from God. That is the difference. And we already looked into his claim. He said he used to be an Atheist. Prophets could never be atheists at anytime. From childhood they know all things. Like Jesus who, when He was a toddler, He was speaking of the Day of Judgement.

Yeah he claimed he brought a new revelation.

Why can't they be Athiest? By your standard, God can do whatever he wants and change his mind. Maybe he wants to do one of those deceiving tests you always talk about.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yeah he claimed he brought a new revelation.

Why can't they be Athiest? By your standard, God can do whatever he wants and change his mind. Maybe he wants to do one of those deceiving tests you always talk about.

I see Allah makes it simple and it is us that complicates it Link.

By their fruits and prophecies we shall know them. By this standard, the Messengers of Allah are made manifest.

It is thus very obvious why they are not going to be Athiest.

Regards Tony