Why did the world reject the Messiah when He Did come?

[Desert Snake]

When I use the name "God", I don't mean deity
In french "God" is called "Dieu"

Those are contextual and linguistic matters, and God, as a name without specification, cannot be compared necessarily, to other language usage》》inference to who is meant.

 

[stvdv]

It isn't ' in my humble opinion', it's linguistic reference to who and what is being talked about. If you write 'g-d', as a name without specification, I correlate it to the direct word usage, thusly if you use it incorrectly, it isn't clear, and is obfuscatory, in any conversation relating to theistic matters.

The way I used God was not "random garbage" as you called it

 

[Desert Snake]

As 'linguistic yet not religious' language parallel, in order to avoid obfuscation, we would therefore use the specific linguistic correlate, [there are again, a 'certain amount' of these correlates, and they defer to the original language.


•
As a matter of religious belief, thusly, the name might infer another reference, however we would not use the name 'G-d', in an scholarly discussion, where that wouldn't be clear.

 

[Desert Snake]

The way I used God was not "random garbage" as you called it

It was 'incorrect' in both context of argument, and non-obfuscatory use of the name and word, G-d.

That is why I explained that the English name for my god, is God, and further, that is the name that I generally use to refer to my god, in English.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

But I'll take your advice for now. May it rain in Queensland. (A friend's daughter is studying law in Brisbane.)

Our wet season starts with storms in October, but we need a couple of weeks of 40+, so we do not look forward to that It is January when we expect the wet!

Regards Tony

 

[stvdv]

It was 'incorrect' in both context of argument, and non-obfuscatory use of the name and word, G-d.

That is why I explained that the English name for my god, is God, and further, that is the name that I generally use to refer to my god, in English.

I never use(d) the word G-d

It was 'incorrect' in your opinion at best

It is correct in my opinion

We talk about God, remember!
Meaning faith, belief. So not a fact.
Religion stuff, especially the word "God" is subjective.

 

[Desert Snake]

I never use(d) the word G-d

It was 'incorrect' in your opinion at best

It is correct in my opinion

We talk about God, remember!
Meaning faith, belief. So not a fact.
Religion stuff, especially the word "God" is subjective.

G-d is a way of writing God. Same name.

No, it actually isn't subjective, when used in a vague context, it's just vague.

 

[Desert Snake]

I never use(d) the word G-d

It was 'incorrect' in your opinion at best

It is correct in my opinion

We talk about God, remember!
Meaning faith, belief. So not a fact.
Religion stuff, especially the word "God" is subjective.

I already explained that the name is 'literal specific'. You just don't realize that, because you use the word in 'only descriptive' manner [with no description.

 

[stvdv]

I already explained that the name is 'literal specific'. You just don't realize that, because you use the word in 'only descriptive' manner [with no description.

I agree to disagree on this one

 

[Desert Snake]

I agree to disagree on this one

Yes of course. That means that your discussions in a theistic context are going to generally vague, or even meaningless.

 

[stvdv]

I suggest you read commentary by Prabhupada. Delineation is clearly there, you seem to be getting , 'everything goes to Krishna', perhaps, mixed up with 'every deity is Krishna'.

And 'every religion is the same', or however you worded that.

You misunderstood what I meant.

I don't have this click with Krishna as others have, He never comes to me in visions or dreams. What to do? I usually don't think about Krishna except once a year maybe (as yesterday in my reply; now since on RF I'm reminded sometimes when on Hindu DIR)

So definitely this is not a thought in my mind:
" 'everything goes to Krishna', perhaps, mixed up with 'every deity is Krishna'."

And I don't believe every religion is the same. Some do have similar aspects in them as far as I have seen

And Prabupada is not my favorite to read, so thanks for your advice, but I stick to my Master.

 

[Shad]

Assertions that can be investigated to see if there is any foundation in Truth.

As an example about the knowledge quote;

If we look at the progress of man in science and discovery, we get to see a long steady rise since records began until the 1800's. Then in the 1800's the line begins to shoot skywards and continues to do so.

Thus the Assertion can be shown to be valid and we can consider the Bab did open the door of that knowledge. Which then also supports the posted Biblical verse. You do not have to see it that way, that is your choice.

You still have no proved anything about Bab's knowledge or that he contributed a single thing beyond vague religious babble. You are just merely making another assertion to back an assertion.

Also we have a bonus thought. The first Message ever sent accross the wires, opening the door to modern communications, was taken from the book of Numbers, 'What has God Wrought?" That was the day after the Bab declared in May 1844. Another way to view as to how 25 letters of knowledge were released by God.

Prove God. Prove God sends messengers. You seem to forgot that part. Instead you just asserted your religious view without evidence.

You also get to choose if that is useless knowledge, but for me it is just plain wonderfully amazing and thank God for that.

Regards Tony

You only demonstrated you have no standard nor evidence to support your religious assertions.

 

[Shaul]

Yes some I agree on some points. But I think that most people expect it to happen instantly rather than being an unfolding process.

Think about the prophecy of the wolf and the lamb lying together I.e. once hostile and antagonistic religions races and nations finding peace.

If we maintain that this must happen instantaneously overnight upon the appearance of the Messiah then to one and all He has not come because we are not yet at peace.

But if it is an unfolding process not an overnight event then there are many signs the messiah has indeed appeared as the process of reconciliation between races, religions and nations has definitely begun.

The UN, the early glimmerings of the unity of nations can be seen universally, interfaith - the different religions coming together in a spirit of oneness and worldwide movements towards racial harmony and essential equality between men and women.

These are processes happening all over the world indicating to me a Messiah has indeed appeared thus setting the world on a path of peace and reconciliation despite objections by some.

It does not mean that because these things have not come to pass overnight that the Messiah has not come yet.

It took Moses and His followers much time and suffering before they reached the Promised Land. It didn’t happen overnight.

It’s the same with Christians. They expect an instant overnight waving of a magic wand and everyone will attain salvation when it is us who have to work and toil for everything we earn.

The wording of scripture is clear. The foretold events such as world peace and gathering of the tribes of Israel back to the Promised land happen simultaneously with the coming of the moshiach. The moshiach can’t come and then these events happen gradually after he has come. These events did not happen yet. Jesus isn’t the moshiach.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The wording of scripture is clear. The foretold events such as world peace and gathering of the tribes of Israel back to the Promised land happen simultaneously with the coming of the moshiach. The moshiach can’t come and then these events happen gradually after he has come. These events did not happen yet. Jesus isn’t the moshiach.

I see that most people see that Scripture is clear, to their own way of understanding. I see that is why when G_d sends His Messengers and that is why they are rejected, we are to proud to let go of our perceived knowledge.

They show us what the Word means, but we have made up our own mind and neglect our part of G_d's covenant and we persecute those sent from G_d to guide us unto all truth.

I see history has proved we have repeated this mistake.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You still have no proved anything about Bab's knowledge or that he contributed a single thing beyond vague religious babble. You are just merely making another assertion to back an assertion.

Prove God. Prove God sends messengers. You seem to forgot that part. Instead you just asserted your religious view without evidence.

You only demonstrated you have no standard nor evidence to support your religious assertions.

A good metephor is that 'the proof is in the pudding'.

Thing is, Im not here to make anybody eat it, or even to try some, but that metephor will tell a person why they may not see the proof.

It is ones own choice to partake of the pudding, or ones choice to demand where the proof of the pudding is.

Regards Tony

 

[Riders]

Well I was not being direct as the other post on this topic, so yes it is the question.

I see Jesus can be seen as being the Messiah, but it takes far more spiritual interpretation seeing that, than it would seeing Baha'u'llah as the Messiah. Many more prophecies can be proven by Baha'u'llah, than can be by Jesus.

In saying that, I see Jesus the Christ is Baha'u'llah. It is the Spirit that is life, the flesh amounts to nothing.

Regards Tony

So we're talking both Jesus and Bahaula .Your religion says they are the same.I accept Jesus as a Prophet not the Godman taught by Christianity.

I have not read any Ba"hai literature as of yet but I am sure there is some truth in it.I am universal in my thinking too so saying both prophets we're the same makes sense to me.But I'm not a member of your religion.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So we're talking both Jesus and Bahaula .Your religion says they are the same.I accept Jesus as a Prophet not the Godman taught by Christianity.

I have not read any Ba"hai literature as of yet but I am sure there is some truth in it.I am universal in my thinking too so saying both prophets we're the same makes sense to me.But I'm not a member of your religion.

Good to hear from you riders. Faith is a personal journey and all we can do is share what we have found in our lives.

This post is to explore the topic of the Messiah. Before my comments, what have you found about the Biblical promises that peace will come and Gods name will be one?

I have found in my search that God has sent many Prophets, I see that is the way God has chosen to speak to us all.

As such I see we can find God in all the Messages given by all of Gods Prophets. I also see they all, in one way or another, have promised a day when we will become one people and live in peace. I see this is that time and peace will come. I have found the Messiah has brought that day.

Regards Tony

 

[paarsurrey]

Well I was not being direct as the other post on this topic, so yes it is the question.

I see Jesus can be seen as being the Messiah, but it takes far more spiritual interpretation seeing that, than it would seeing Baha'u'llah as the Messiah. Many more prophecies can be proven by Baha'u'llah, than can be by Jesus.

In saying that, I see Jesus the Christ is Baha'u'llah. It is the Spirit that is life, the flesh amounts to nothing.

Regards Tony

"Baha'u'llah as the Messiah"

Did Bahaullah himself claim in a straightforward and unequivocal manner to be the Jewish Messiah. If yes, please, quote from the Kitab-i-Iqan or the Book of Certitude- a core book of his thought, please.

Regards

 

[loverofhumanity]

The wording of scripture is clear. The foretold events such as world peace and gathering of the tribes of Israel back to the Promised land happen simultaneously with the coming of the moshiach. The moshiach can’t come and then these events happen gradually after he has come. These events did not happen yet. Jesus isn’t the moshiach.

I believe it’s happening now. The Jews were officially allowed to return to Israel when the Edict Of Toleration was signed in March 21st 1844 and since then Israel has become a state. Other signs are things like the spread of interfaith and multiculturalism and world consultation between nations.

Edict of Toleration 1844 - Wikipedia

I’m referring to Baha’u’llah not Jesus.

 

[Vinayaka]

How is it possible to reject something you've never heard of?