The Son of Man and the Saints of Daniel 7

[firedragon]

Was Jesus quoting the Tanakh when He talked about the Son of man in the clouds of heaven?

That question you are asking from me, and I am not a Christian or a Bahai. Thus, I do not believe any of the Gospels were written by Jesus or any of his disciples, neither do some of the most prominent Christian scholars. So no, I will not answer that because we dont know whether Jesus ever said those words. All we know is it is written copying the Septuagint by a Greek writer, taking from a Greek version of the Tanakh which is flawed. So that question is a loaded question.

 

[Trailblazer]

Okay. If you say that Bahaullah was not quoting the Bible but himself, then I must accept it as your theological point of view. Then the Bible prophecy cannot be about him because he not quoting the bible.

Simply because Baha'u'llah was not quoting the Bible, that does not mean that the Bible prophecy is not about Him. In reality, it is either about Him or it is not. I mean Baha'u'llah was either the Son of man who came in the clouds of heaven or not.

So you changed your position about it. Fine. Bahaullah says Jesus is the author of the Gospel. Now you say that he said in another tablet that Jesus was not the author of the Gospel. Thats a contradiction.

I do not see that as a contradiction; these statements are simply two different ways of saying that Jesus was responsible for what is contained in the Gospel.

Please quote me this Tablet.

Please bear in mind this is not an authoritative translation of the Writings of Baha'u'llah,it is a preliminary translation.

The Four Gospels were written after Him [Christ]. John, Luke, Mark and Matthew - these four wrote after Christ what they remembered of His utterances.
(From a previously untranslated Tablet)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

I didnt ask about any other faith other than yours. Bahaullah is quoting verbatim the "misunderstood quotes", and my question is about the authenticity of it because of its discrepancy.

Unless there is a footnote in the text, He is not quoting anything verbatim.

You say "you dont care". I never asked about any other faith, nor did I ask Christians or Jews about the Bahai faith. I asked a Bahai about the Bahai faith.

I hope you understand brother. It was you guys who inspired me to read your own scripture. Only two days ago I read the Kithab I Iqan, in both languages because of one of your own's request. Thats why today I know the book. Three days ago, I did not except for a few snippets here and there.

With all due respect, what you are asking me is why Baha'u'llah wrote the text the way He did and I am not privy to that information. Wikipedia has some general information about The Kitab-Iqan, and in the Notes and References there are some articles you can refer to.

 

[Trailblazer]

That question you are asking from me, and I am not a Christian or a Bahai. Thus, I do not believe any of the Gospels were written by Jesus or any of his disciples, neither do some of the most prominent Christian scholars. So no, I will not answer that because we dont know whether Jesus ever said those words. All we know is it is written copying the Septuagint by a Greek writer, taking from a Greek version of the Tanakh which is flawed. So that question is a loaded question.

I fully agree, we cannot know if Jesus ever uttered those words for the reasons you stated, but do you think that Moses wrote or uttered the words in the Tanakh that are attributed to Him? I mean how an we know? And for that matter, how can we know that Muhammad actually uttered all the words attributed to Him in the Qur'an?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So Bahaullah himself revealed the Pentateuch to Moses?

No God did, it is explained as such;

"... Bahá’u’lláh is not the Intermediary between other Manifestations and God. Each has His own relation to the Primal Source. But in the sense that Bahá’u’lláh is the greatest Manifestation to yet appear, the One Who consummates the Revelation of Moses, He was the One Moses conversed with in the Burning Bush. In other words Bahá’u’lláh identifies the Glory of the Godhead on that occasion with Himself. No distinction can be made amongst the Prophets in the sense that They all proceed from one source, and are of one essence. But Their stations and functions in this world are different.... "

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

Simply because Baha'u'llah was not quoting the Bible, that does not mean that the Bible prophecy is not about Him. In reality, it is either about Him or it is not. I mean Baha'u'llah was either the Son of man who came in the clouds of heaven or not.

Thats true. So what you are saying is that though Bahaullah is not quoting the Bible, the prophecy maybe for him. Which means it was not Bahaullah who said that prophecy points at him, but later others decided they did.

That I agree.

I do not see that as a contradiction; these statements are simply two different ways of saying that Jesus was responsible for what is contained in the Gospel.

A: Jesus was the author of the Gospel (Kithab I Iqan)
B: Jesus was NOT the author of the Gospel (Bahaullahs tablet you quoted)

If you say that's not a contradiction I can't accept it. But then again, I have not read the "tablet" so maybe you are right that based on the context it says something that I have not understood or even read. So that's why I am asking for what tablet this is mentioned in so that I can go read. Please give me the reference and I will read.

Please bear in mind this is not an authoritative translation of the Writings of Baha'u'llah,it is a preliminary translation.

The Four Gospels were written after Him [Christ]. John, Luke, Mark and Matthew - these four wrote after Christ what they remembered of His utterances.
(From a previously untranslated Tablet)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

Thanks for that. I read it now.

I dont know if I am seeing things, but this translation seems to say that "those four wrote", not "those four were written" which means its speaking about the writers, not the literature, which means if this is authentic Bahaullah thought the four Gospels were written by four people named John, Luke, Mark and Matthew. Now we know that those are not authentic and were added later by some one else.

Anyway if this is not translated, yet if you have a manuscript scan I can get it translated in no time. I would love to do that.

Unless there is a footnote in the text, He is not quoting anything verbatim.

You didnt understand the point.

With all due respect, what you are asking me is why Baha'u'llah wrote the text the way He did and I am not privy to that information. Wikipedia has some general information about The Kitab-Iqan, and in the Notes and References there are some articles you can refer to.

No problem brother.

 

[firedragon]

I fully agree, we cannot know if Jesus ever uttered those words for the reasons you stated, but do you think that Moses wrote or uttered the words in the Tanakh that are attributed to Him? I mean how an we know? And for that matter, how can we know that Muhammad actually uttered all the words attributed to Him in the Qur'an?

You see brother. What you are doing is called a Tu Quoque fallacy.

Anyway, I opened a thread to discuss these kind of topics because all the time people start bringing in the Quran asking "how do you know this or that" in an irrelevant topic. Its not relevant, and if you want the thread to discuss this I will give you the link.

Peace.

 

[firedragon]

No God did, it is explained as such;

"... Bahá’u’lláh is not the Intermediary between other Manifestations and God. Each has His own relation to the Primal Source. But in the sense that Bahá’u’lláh is the greatest Manifestation to yet appear, the One Who consummates the Revelation of Moses, He was the One Moses conversed with in the Burning Bush. In other words Bahá’u’lláh identifies the Glory of the Godhead on that occasion with Himself. No distinction can be made amongst the Prophets in the sense that They all proceed from one source, and are of one essence. But Their stations and functions in this world are different.... "

Regards Tony

Of course.


I may have misunderstood your statement earlier.

 

[Trailblazer]

Thats true. So what you are saying is that though Bahaullah is not quoting the Bible, the prophecy maybe for him. Which means it was not Bahaullah who said that prophecy points at him, but later others decided they did.

That I agree

No, Baha'u'llah did not specifically say that the prophecy about the Son of man in the clouds points to Him.

A: Jesus was the author of the Gospel (Kithab I Iqan)
B: Jesus was NOT the author of the Gospel (Bahaullahs tablet you quoted)

If you say that's not a contradiction I can't accept it. But then again, I have not read the "tablet" so maybe you are right that based on the context it says something that I have not understood or even read. So that's why I am asking for what tablet this is mentioned in so that I can go read. Please give me the reference and I will read.

I dont know if I am seeing things, but this translation seems to say that "those four wrote", not "those four were written" which means its speaking about the writers, not the literature, which means if this is authentic Bahaullah thought the four Gospels were written by four people named John, Luke, Mark and Matthew. Now we know that those are not authentic and were added later by some one else.

Anyway if this is not translated, yet if you have a manuscript scan I can get it translated in no time. I would love to do that

I still say when the Kitab-i-Iqan says "Jesus, the Author of the Gospel", given the context, I do not think it was intended to be taken literally. Another possibility is that it was a translation error, so it did not mean author in the original language. More problematic to me is that untranslated tablet that says: "The Four Gospels were written after Him [Christ]. John, Luke, Mark and Matthew - these four wrote after Christ what they remembered of His utterances" because we know the gospels were not written by those four disciples.

I would appreciate a translation but I do not know how I could locate that tablet. Maybe when I have time I can do some digging.

 

[Trailblazer]

You see brother. What you are doing is called a Tu Quoque fallacy.

Sheesh, and I thought I had heard of all the logical fallacies. (again, I am sister Susan....)
By the way, I was not implying that the Qur'an is not authentic. It is a Baha'i belief that the Qur'an is the only reliable scripture aside from the Writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

From Letters Written on Behalf of the Guardian:

...The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh.
(28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

We cannot be sure of the authenticity of any of the phrases in the Old or the New Testament. What we can be sure of is when such references or words are cited or quoted in either the Quran or the Bahá'í writings.
(4 July 1947 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments

Anyway, I opened a thread to discuss these kind of topics because all the time people start bringing in the Quran asking "how do you know this or that" in an irrelevant topic. Its not relevant, and if you want the thread to discuss this I will give you the link.

Peace.

Go ahead and send me the link but I probably won't have much time to read or reply unless these other threads slow down.

 

[firedragon]

No, Baha'u'llah did not specifically say that the prophecy about the Son of man in the clouds points to Him.

I know that TB

I still say when the Kitab-i-Iqan says "Jesus, the Author of the Gospel", given the context, I do not think it was intended to be taken literally. Another possibility is that it was a translation error, so it did not mean author in the original language. More problematic to me is that untranslated tablet that says: "The Four Gospels were written after Him [Christ]. John, Luke, Mark and Matthew - these four wrote after Christ what they remembered of His utterances" because we know the gospels were not written by those four disciples.

I would appreciate a translation but I do not know how I could locate that tablet. Maybe when I have time I can do some digging.

Hmm. Well, it could be a mistranslation. But I doubt it. Yet, if I confirm this I will let you know. At the moment I cannot deny what you say is a possibility. I dont understand how someone like Effendi can make such an error. Its next to impossible, unless one intends to mistranslate.

If you could please be kind enough to find me the page number only, I can get it confirmed rather than making assumptions.

Sheesh, and I thought I had heard of all the logical fallacies. (again, I am sister Susan....)

I was kind of thinking you were a sister like one minute ago. But you see, I have got enough embarrassment calling ladies brother in this forum that my foot has never come out of my mouth. Also, I have a bad memory of avatar names. So you should blame it on old age and pardon me with some excuse please.

By the way, I was not implying that the Qur'an is not authentic. It is a Baha'i belief that the Qur'an is the only reliable scripture aside from the Writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Dont be mistaken. I know that the Bahai's take Quran in authority as authentic. What I meant is, when discussing the Bible, to bring in the Quran say "how do you know this" is called the Tu Quoque fallacy. I am not saying that to offend you. I am saying that since its easier to explain a lengthy explanation concisely in three words why its irrelevant.

Anyway if you do wish to compare like that, its alright. I can give you enough and more reasons.

1. Quran manuscripts go back to Muhammeds life time with carbon dating. Manuscripts Arabe 328.
2. Quran manuscripts date to Muhammeds time based on palaeographic dating.
3. Apply form criticism on the Quran and see if you could come up with a general outcome like you would with the Bible. Try the methodology of lets say "Wellhausen" and/or any of the latter, more sophisticated methodologies on the Qur'an.
4. Ask a philologist to read the Quran, analyse it and tell you how many authors wrote it.
5. Quran manuscripts are dated to Muhammeds time by the Maail of the script. Unmistaken.
6. Quran, in its text claims to be the Furqan given to Muhammed.

Thats why. I dont think you disbelieve in the Quran. You just asked the question as part of the discussion. No problem. But can you even think of meeting these criteria with any of the Bibles? Tanakh or the "New Testament", 40 or 50 authors, 66, 73, or 75 books, 27 or 29 books in the NT. Think of these points which are just very few and tell me if any of them can be met. I can vouch for you that none of them can be met.

Go ahead and send me the link but I probably won't have much time to read or reply unless these other threads slow down.

I will get you the link. But its not necessary that you go there and make a question. Hockey sis?

Quran and New Testament, are they the same in authorship, manuscript evidence, textual reliability?

 

[Eyes to See]

Do you think Jesus could have been ruling as King over His people before this?

Christ is head of the congregation.-Ephesians 5:23. He is thus ruler over the congregation of God on earth, both of the chosen and called, and those who have the earthly hope. He is now ruling as king over the entire Christian congregation on earth and has been over his people since returning to heaven.

 

[Eyes to See]

In the past the Watch Tower has said that the 144,000 was complete but these days it seems to be increasing since we see more people participating in the Lords Supper at Kingdom Halls.(something only those in the 144,000 are supposed to do) How is this happening if the 144,000 is full already? Does that mean that the Watch Tower has been wrong about the 144,000 being complete?

Fred Franz made the statement that the call to heavenly life ended in 1935. But since then many 10's of thousands have been called. The Watchtower has several times printed the fact that that understanding was wrong. And that Jehovah has continued to call people to heaven all throughout the last days. This has been in print for well over a decade. How many decades have you been out of touch with the truth?

 

[Eyes to See]

That is correct, Baha'u'llah was speaking from His own innate knowledge as well as from what was revealed to Him by God.

I remember when I was a teenager I would work with many aged and wise elders of the congregation and I took the time to pick their minds when with them. One time is recalled to my mind now. I was sharing scripture with a person in our witnessing work and the person was belligerent, even scolding us and yelling at us. We left him. This brother looked at me and said a receptive heart is opened by one or two scriptures. Share a simple truth, if God does not open their hearts to discern simple things, how can they appreciate the deep things of God.

Jesus said that after he would die, and after the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, many would come in his name saying they were the Messiah and mislead many:

“Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it.  For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones.  Look! I have forewarned you. Therefore, if people say to you, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; ‘Look! He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it."-Matthew 24:23-26.

Do you think when Baha'ullah appeared and said he was the Christ the prophecy of false Messiahs was talking about him? Obviously you do not. But Jesus said not to believe it when they appeared and claimed to be him in the wilderness, or in the inner rooms.

Jesus said when he returned it will be as lightning coming out of the east and shining to the west. And that carcasses will be where the eagles are gathered together:

"For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be. Wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together."-Matthew 24:27-28.

The Baha'i faith teaches that Baha'ullah succeeded Jesus. But scripture says that Jesus needs no successor:

"But because he continues alive forever, his priesthood has no successors.  So he is able also to save completely those who are approaching God through him, because he is always alive to plead for them."-Hebrews 7:24, 25.

The Bible warns that if anyone comes after the gospels to rewrite them or go beyond what they say that they are cursed, be it a human or an angel in heaven:

"However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed."-Galatians 1:8.

You were shown clearly in the Bible that Jesus is the son of man foretold but you do not believe the Bible. You don't believe God's word. You need to look inward and assess why your heart rejects what God is telling us from his inspired word of truth.

 

[Eyes to See]

We know that Daniel 8 gives us the exact time Messiah would arrive on earth and tells us that he would die, and that God had thusly decided to have Jerusalem and its temple destroyed (Daniel 9:25-26).

I was just rereading my post and noticed I wrote Daniel 8 when the quote is from Daniel 9:25, 26. It is too late for me to edit the OP so I am making the correction here.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Hmm. Well, it could be a mistranslation. But I doubt it. Yet, if I confirm this I will let you know. At the moment I cannot deny what you say is a possibility. I dont understand how someone like Effendi can make such an error. Its next to impossible, unless one intends to mistranslate

There is no doubt to me that it would be our understanding of what is being offerd and not Shoghi Effendi.

I have found we can get to caught up on meanings of individual words and overlook what a whole passage is offering. Shoghi Effendi had that grasp of the Message as a whole. That is why Translation is a tricky game, as when does it become interpretation. Shoghi Effendi had the authority of interpretation as well, that is no longer available.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

There is no doubt to me that it would be our understanding of what is being offerd and not Shoghi Effendi.

I have found we can get to caught up on meanings of individual words and overlook what a whole passage is offering. Shoghi Effendi had that grasp of the Message as a whole. That is why Translation is a tricky game, as when does it become interpretation. Shoghi Effendi had the authority of interpretation as well, that is no longer available.

Regards Tony

No no. I dont think Effendi made any mistake, and especially not something like that because if you read an arabic sentence like "Kathabahu" it is definitely "written by", not "written later". Impossible. Not even a kindergarten kid would make such a mistake. Yet, this cannot be ignored and cast aside just as a translation of one word. Its not just one word that mattered, it was a whole course of study that some people go through for a number years. Sometimes a decade. Sometimes a lifetime.

If one question cannot be answered, casting it aside by saying something like that is beneath you my friend. Its invalid.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

No no. I dont think Effendi made any mistake, and especially not something like that because if you read an arabic sentence like "Kathabahu" it is definitely "written by", not "written later". Impossible. Not even a kindergarten kid would make such a mistake. Yet, this cannot be ignored and cast aside just as a translation of one word. Its not just one word that mattered, it was a whole course of study that some people go through for a number years. Sometimes a decade. Sometimes a lifetime.

If one question cannot be answered, casting it aside by saying something like that is beneath you my friend. Its invalid.

Sorry I was not saying what you are thinking I was offering , just delete what I said, I should have stayed away from the conversation.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

No no. I dont think Effendi made any mistake, and especially not something like that because if you read an arabic sentence like "Kathabahu" it is definitely "written by", not "written later". Impossible. Not even a kindergarten kid would make such a mistake. Yet, this cannot be ignored and cast aside just as a translation of one word. Its not just one word that mattered, it was a whole course of study that some people go through for a number years. Sometimes a decade. Sometimes a lifetime.

That also brought to mind that Muhammad was also accused of Kindergarten grammer mistakes, as was the Bab at his trial.

Actually the Bab's trail became a farce as the divines ridiculed grammer mistakes, when it it God that sets the standard in God’s given Word.

Just a thought for us all to consider, when we try to explain what we are saying.

Regards Tony

 

[firedragon]

That also brought to mind that Muhammad was also accused of Kindergarten grammer mistakes, as was the Bab at his trial.

I think you misunderstood me. I did not say Effendi made any error. Please read again without reading it with your emotions interfering.

And I dont know who accused Muhammed of making "kindergarten grammar mistakes" and I would like to see who did. If you are making that statement just because you need to say something back at me because "YOU THOUGHT" I was saying Effendi made a mistake, that's being quite childish brother. Dont do that.

If you have never read the Quran, or you have no formal education on it, that's perfectly fine, but you should know to make a bit of research prior to making statements like that. Muhammed made Kindergarten mistakes? Really? The Quran is considered the furqan alnahwul arabiyyi, or the yardstick of arabic grammar. So saying the text book of arabic has "kindergarten grammatical errors" is an oxymoron. If you are saying this because some layman said this in a book that's your lack of research, not that that statement has any validity.

I cannot understand why you would resort to a Tu Quoque like that just because either you cannot answer a simple question honestly, or you misunderstood it completely. If you did not understand, just clarify it. We are after all human beings, and we can make mistakes. Thus rather than jumping at another person with such a Tu Quoque, and such a statement that's absolutely absurd, its better to clarify.

Read this carefully.

"I WAS SAYING THAT Shoghi Effendi CANNOT MAKE SUCH AN ERROR. HE NEVER DID".

Peace.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I think you misunderstood me. I did not say Effendi made any error. Please read again without reading it with your emotions interfering.

And I dont know who accused Muhammed of making "kindergarten grammar mistakes" and I would like to see who did. If you are making that statement just because you need to say something back at me because "YOU THOUGHT" I was saying Effendi made a mistake, that's being quite childish brother. Dont do that.

If you have never read the Quran, or you have no formal education on it, that's perfectly fine, but you should know to make a bit of research prior to making statements like that. Muhammed made Kindergarten mistakes? Really? The Quran is considered the furqan alnahwul arabiyyi, or the yardstick of arabic grammar. So saying the text book of arabic has "kindergarten grammatical errors" is an oxymoron. If you are saying this because some layman said this in a book that's your lack of research, not that that statement has any validity.

I cannot understand why you would resort to a Tu Quoque like that just because either you cannot answer a simple question honestly, or you misunderstood it completely. If you did not understand, just clarify it. We are after all human beings, and we can make mistakes. Thus rather than jumping at another person with such a Tu Quoque, and such a statement that's absolutely absurd, its better to clarify.

Read this carefully.

"I WAS SAYING THAT Shoghi Effendi CANNOT MAKE SUCH AN ERROR. HE NEVER DID".

Peace.

It is most likely because I am not listening to what you are offering and to that I apologise, my time is short before work and I am on my way.

I thought you would be aware that Muhammed was accused of error. A quick net search shows lots of information is available.

Regards Tony