"Gospel Plagiarism" & bahai cultish indoctrinated mystical tosh
reli...@yahoo.com
inclosed is an example of islamic/bahai plagiarism from the Christian
gospel coupled with their oxymoronic double speak to deceive ignorant
westerners (not well read in the Christian bible) into believing that
the *Most Great guidance* was Husayn-`Ali Nuri, a Persian Sufi shi'ite
muslim (1817-1892) renamed Baha'u'llah (founder of bahaism) instead of
the gospel of Jesus Christ (founder of Christianity).
"It is stated in the blessed Gospel: Travel ye toward the East and
toward the West and enlighten the people with the light of the Most
Great Guidance, so that they may take a portion and share of eternal
life.[Cf. Mark 16:15.]" 1 TABLET TO THE Bahá'íS OF THE NORTHEASTERN
STATES http://bahai-library.org/writings/abdulbaha/tdp/sec-2.html
Examples of their cultish outlandish mystical tosh are published in
these bahai phamplets. http://www.stonehaven-press.com/index.htm
Newcomers to the Bahai Faith will find it hard to come upon any
literature on this religion other than the hagiography the Bahai Faith
have censored and published themselves free on the internet.
Excellent books such as "Modernity and Milennium" by Juan Cole
http://bahai-library.org/reviews/cole.modernity.html
And "Resurrection and Renewal" by Abbas Amanat are indeed scholarly
and non-hagiographical
http://www.weiserantiquarian.com/cgi-bin/wab455/9146.html
but they still have to be purchased and may not be available in every
University or local library especially outside the USA or Canada.
William Millar's book "The Baha'i Faith": Its History and
Teachings Published by the William Carey Library 533 Hermosa Street
South Pasadena, Calif. 91030 is free to be read world wide on
the internet, but is a must for the student who wishes have a
controversial historical view of The Bahai faith, write essays,
while attending secondary level education or write a thesis or Phd
while at University. Free book to download
http://www.gospelcom.net/wclbooks/thebahaifaith/Cover-Pages.htm
http://www.gospelcom.net/wclbooks/thebahaifaith/TableofContents.htm
QisQos
> Dear friends & newcomers to TRB
> toward the West and enlighten the people with the light of the Most
> Great Guidance, so that they may take a portion and share of eternal
> life.[Cf. Mark 16:15.]" 1 TABLET TO THE Bahá'íS OF THE NORTHEASTERN
> STATES http://bahai-library.org/writings/abdulbaha/tdp/sec-2.html
>
Of course this is a serious liberty taken with the original text of
Mark 16:15.
This same Abdul Baha, wishing to selectively use the gospel to spread
the lies of his father, elsewhere denies the following verse
Mark 16:19. And the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken
up into heaven and sitteth on the right hand of God.
So how are we to believe that Jesus was not taken in his resurrected
body to Heaven which as AB says "violates the laws of mathematics" YET
believe AB when he and his father corrupt the text of an earlier
verse to suit their purposes?
Clearly Abdul Baha is attempting to deceive the gullible into
believing that his father is the "return of Christ" when in fact Our
Lord Jesus Christ is supposed to return in the same body He left in,
and from the same place he went to, Heaven: being born as yet another
son of the polygamous Bozorg Mirza in a Persian harem is not the
meaning of the Christian doctrine of the Return of Christ. (Of course
those who eagerly believe in a millenialist point of view, like the
contemporary "Left Behind" and "Late Great Planet Earth" types are
easily deceived by such shenanigans.)
This is not a figurative return, not to be interpreted symbolically in
terms of "manifestation" but as the triumphal return of Jesus Christ
to rule His Church. Likewise the resurrection is not that nonsense
that Bahullah speaks of as the "quickening" of souls upon hearing his
teachings, it is the resurrection of the body as stated in the
Scriptures and in the Nicean Creed.
QuisQuos
Susan Maneck
>This is not a figurative return, not to be interpreted symbolically in
>terms of "manifestation"
That's the same thing the Jews believed about the return of Elijah. He could
return because he supposedly never died. Yet Jesus affirmed that John the
Baptist was the Return of Elijah.
warmest, Susan
http://bahaistudies.net/susanmaneck/
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st
reli...@yahoo.com
at sma...@aol.com wrote on 8/11/03 3:39 pm:
>>
>> This is not a figurative return, not to be interpreted symbolically
in
>> terms of "manifestation"
>
> That's the same thing the Jews believed about the return of Elijah. He
> could return because he supposedly never died. Yet Jesus affirmed that
> John the Baptist was the Return of Elijah.
And what may I ask has this to do with Islam or baha'ism?
The bahai myth that the bab was the return of john the baptist is
another example of Gospel Plagiarism and indoctrinated mystical
tosh.....Errol
Jerry Joplin
> Of course this is a serious liberty taken with the original text of
> Mark 16:15.
>
> This same Abdul Baha, wishing to selectively use the gospel to spread
> the lies of his father, elsewhere denies the following verse
Begging the question QisQos! But in your last drive-by-posting, you
included a strawman based on a flawed premise, and never came back to
support it. So I'll doubt you'll bother with this one either.
> Mark 16:19. And the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken
> up into heaven and sitteth on the right hand of God.
>
> So how are we to believe that Jesus was not taken in his resurrected
> body to Heaven which as AB says "violates the laws of mathematics" YET
> believe AB when he and his father corrupt the text of an earlier
> verse to suit their purposes?
Its interesting you would talk about "corrupting the text" of Mark
16:19. It is the opinion of the majority of Biblical scholars that Mark
16:9-20 was added a few centuries after Mark's original gospel was
composed. The real ending (if any) has been lost.
And to support your premise that it must be the body which sits at the
right hand of the Father, then you'll have to give the Father a body
too. Are you saying the Father also has a human body?
> Clearly Abdul Baha is attempting to deceive the gullible into
> believing that his father is the "return of Christ" when in fact Our
> Lord Jesus Christ is supposed to return in the same body He left in,
> and from the same place he went to, Heaven: being born as yet another
> son of the polygamous Bozorg Mirza in a Persian harem is not the
> meaning of the Christian doctrine of the Return of Christ. (Of course
> those who eagerly believe in a millenialist point of view, like the
> contemporary "Left Behind" and "Late Great Planet Earth" types are
> easily deceived by such shenanigans.)
Clearly? Clearly nothing, you're basing this (again) on a flawed
premise. The entire passage above is a strawman.
> This is not a figurative return, not to be interpreted symbolically in
> terms of "manifestation" but as the triumphal return of Jesus Christ
> to rule His Church. Likewise the resurrection is not that nonsense
> that Bahullah speaks of as the "quickening" of souls upon hearing his
> teachings, it is the resurrection of the body as stated in the
> Scriptures and in the Nicean Creed.
Baha'u'llah _was_ triumphant in his return! You're doing precisely the
same thing as the Jews of Christ's time by looking for the wrong type of
"triumph." God doesn't conform to your idea of triumphal.
Jerry
Jerry Joplin
>>could return because he supposedly never died. Yet Jesus affirmed that
>>John the Baptist was the Return of Elijah.
>
>
> And what may I ask has this to do with Islam or baha'ism?
>
> The bahai myth that the bab was the return of john the baptist is
> another example of Gospel Plagiarism and indoctrinated mystical
> tosh.....Errol
Why don't you ask Jewish people if Christians were plagiarizing their
scriptures by claiming John the Baptist was Elijah, or the Christ was
the Son of Man?
Tosh...
Jerry
reli...@yahoo.com
Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 8/11/03 5:33 pm:
> Why don't you ask Jewish people if Christians were plagiarizing their
> scriptures by claiming John the Baptist was Elijah, or the Christ was
> the Son of Man? >
> Tosh...
> Jerry
Dear newcomers to TRB please read the article in this website
http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/elijah.htm and you will see
this is the sort of oxymoronic bahai mystical tosh some westerners
like Jerry have let Persian islamic/bahais indoctrinate them into
believing.
Jerry why dont you prove to TRB readers and show us *ONE VERSE* in the
Gospels were it is prophesy John the Baptist will return as the bab?
Errol
Jerry Joplin
> Dear newcomers to TRB please read the article in this website
> http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/elijah.htm and you will see
> this is the sort of oxymoronic bahai mystical tosh some westerners
> like Jerry have let Persian islamic/bahais indoctrinate them into
> believing.
>
> Jerry why dont you prove to TRB readers and show us *ONE VERSE* in the
> Gospels were it is prophesy John the Baptist will return as the bab?
I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
Jerry
MOST@btinternet.com Dermod Ryder
"Jerry Joplin" <Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com> wrote in message
news:vqqkbkr...@corp.supernews.com...
Oldest trick in the book, Janis, to answer one question with another. sadly
it's a transparent trick which simply reveals that you cannot answer the
question posed. You make the point for Reliplur. Well Done!
>
> Jerry
>
Jerry Joplin
> "Jerry Joplin" <Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com> wrote:
>>I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
>>Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
>
>
> Oldest trick in the book, Janis, to answer one question with another. sadly
> it's a transparent trick which simply reveals that you cannot answer the
> question posed. You make the point for Reliplur. Well Done!
Its a "transparent trick" to show him its entirely baseless to allege
the name of the Bab has to be written in the Gospels.
Jerry
reli...@yahoo.com
Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 8/11/03 8:31 pm:
> I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
> Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
But Jerry,
I am not trying to prove or convince you or anyone on TRB or anywhere
else John the Baptist was the return of Elijah. Its a *Plagiarism*
used by Abdul Baha to promote the bab in the west. Susan has already
stated that "Jesus affirmed that John the Baptist was the Return of
Elijah".
Unlike you Jerry and your religion which is trying to convince
gullible westerners the bab was a return of John the baptist, and
baha'u'llah was the return of Christ, like this bahai Joel Smith is
trying to do on his website.
http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/elijah.htm
You would agree, TRB is an unmoderated newsgroup were one can
challenge bahaism and bahai belief's without having your post
censored.
So I ask you another question Jerry, (which I know you wont answer)
where did baha'u'llah say (in one of his writings) the bab is the
return of John the baptist. Remember you are the one defending the
bahai three central figures writings and tablets?
Errol
reli...@yahoo.com
Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 8/11/03 8:52 pm:
> Dermod Ryder wrote:
>> "Jerry Joplin" <Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com> wrote:
>>> I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
>>> Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the
Baptist.
>>
>> Oldest trick in the book, Janis, to answer one question with
another. sadly
>> it's a transparent trick which simply reveals that you cannot
answer the
>> question posed. You make the point for Reliplur. Well Done!
>
> Its a "transparent trick" to show him its entirely baseless to allege
> the name of the Bab has to be written in the Gospels.
Jerry
I never said the name of the bab has to be written in the gospels.
christians believe the second coming is to be the last judgement. A
forerunner like JTB to Christ's second coming is not necessary, and
neither is there any mention of a *forerunner* in the book of
revelation. The bab ( gate) concept comes from Islam as a forerunner
to the Madhi. The way baha'is try and use equivocal language to fit
this sh'ite Islamic/bahai prophesy into christian prophesy is
ludicrous......Errol
Jerry Joplin
> Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 8/11/03 8:31 pm:
>
>>I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
>>Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
>
>
> But Jerry,
>
> I am not trying to prove or convince you or anyone on TRB or anywhere
> else John the Baptist was the return of Elijah. Its a *Plagiarism*
> used by Abdul Baha to promote the bab in the west. Susan has already
> stated that "Jesus affirmed that John the Baptist was the Return of
> Elijah".
Christ himself says John the Baptist is the return of Elijah (Elias) in
the very Gospel you are accusing Baha'is of plagiarizing.
11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
11:15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
(King James Bible, Matthew)
> Unlike you Jerry and your religion which is trying to convince
> gullible westerners the bab was a return of John the baptist, and
> baha'u'llah was the return of Christ, like this bahai Joel Smith is
> trying to do on his website.
>
> http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/elijah.htm
Thanks for link to the site. The Bab's role was that of John the
Baptist, he returned in the same spirit of God as John the Baptist.
> You would agree, TRB is an unmoderated newsgroup were one can
> challenge bahaism and bahai belief's without having your post
> censored.
>
> So I ask you another question Jerry, (which I know you wont answer)
> where did baha'u'llah say (in one of his writings) the bab is the
> return of John the baptist. Remember you are the one defending the
> bahai three central figures writings and tablets?
This is from Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Pope. (Pope Pius IX)
"O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
(Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
Read this together with Christ's saying John the Baptist was Elijah
returned _for those who would believe it._ *If* you have ears to hear,
then the Bab is similarly the return of John the Baptist.
Jerry
Jerry Joplin
> I never said the name of the bab has to be written in the gospels.
> christians believe the second coming is to be the last judgement. A
> forerunner like JTB to Christ's second coming is not necessary, and
> neither is there any mention of a *forerunner* in the book of
> revelation. The bab ( gate) concept comes from Islam as a forerunner
> to the Madhi. The way baha'is try and use equivocal language to fit
> this sh'ite Islamic/bahai prophesy into christian prophesy is
> ludicrous......Errol
First of all, I should thank you for bringing up a topic that actually
pertains to the Baha'i Faith. Thanks! Its great to be discussing
something substantive again.
Okay, here's what you said:
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Jerry why dont you prove to TRB readers and show us *ONE VERSE*
> in the Gospels were it is prophesy John the Baptist will return
> as the bab?
So I asked you to show me the Old Testament verse where it prophesies
Elijah will return as John the Baptist. You can't because it doesn't
exist, yet Christ still said John the Baptist was Elijah. So your
question is irrelevant because:
If you believe in Christ, then you accept Christ's words that John the
Baptist was Elijah.
Same thing for Baha'u'llah, if you believe in Baha'u'llah, then you
accept his words that the Bab was the return of John the Baptist.
Jerry
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
Why isn't there a pink elephant dancing about my lawn this minute? I ask
about the elephant because I don't see much relationship to it and the
other flow of things, much like your question about John the Baptist
returning as the Bab.
I scanned that swell link you provided George. I didn't seem to see its
relationship to your question about the Bab.
As it happens, the Gospel does contain prophecies of the return of Blessed
Jesus Christ, and it contains interpretation of prior Biblical prophecies.
Joel Smith did point out how some of the prophecies in the Old Testament
were fulfilled in the New Testament.
George, "plagiarism" is copying without attribution.
Best wishes!
- Pat
Pat Kohli
Jerry Joplin wrote:
> reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 8/11/03 8:31 pm:
> >
> >>I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
> >>Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
> >
> >
> > But Jerry,
> >
> > I am not trying to prove or convince you or anyone on TRB or anywhere
> > else John the Baptist was the return of Elijah. Its a *Plagiarism*
> > used by Abdul Baha to promote the bab in the west.
(sigh) Please explain how 'Abdu'l Baha's interpretation of Mark is plagiarism
- did 'Abdu'l Baha forget to point out that He was drawing from the Gospels?
> Susan has already
> > stated that "Jesus affirmed that John the Baptist was the Return of
> > Elijah".
>
> Christ himself says John the Baptist is the return of Elijah (Elias) in
> the very Gospel you are accusing Baha'is of plagiarizing.
>
> 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
> 11:15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
> (King James Bible, Matthew)
>
> > Unlike you Jerry and your religion which is trying to convince
> > gullible westerners the bab was a return of John the baptist, and
> > baha'u'llah was the return of Christ, like this bahai Joel Smith is
> > trying to do on his website.
> >
> > http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/elijah.htm
>
> Thanks for link to the site. The Bab's role was that of John the
> Baptist, he returned in the same spirit of God as John the Baptist.
>
I saw the Bab as a Manifestation of God, much like Blessed Jesus Christ.
George posts things about the BF, but he was a Baha'i for a dozen or so years,
and couldn't seem to asimmilate the basic stuff. I'm sure that there are some
similarities between the Bab and John the Baptist, but the Essential Reality
of the Bab was that He was a Manifestation of God, like Jesus Christ, the
Baptist's Cousin.
>
> > You would agree, TRB is an unmoderated newsgroup were one can
> > challenge bahaism and bahai belief's without having your post
> > censored.
> >
> > So I ask you another question Jerry, (which I know you wont answer)
> > where did baha'u'llah say (in one of his writings) the bab is the
> > return of John the baptist. Remember you are the one defending the
> > bahai three central figures writings and tablets?
>
> This is from Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Pope. (Pope Pius IX)
>
> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
>
That is impressive!
>
> Read this together with Christ's saying John the Baptist was Elijah
> returned _for those who would believe it._ *If* you have ears to hear,
> then the Bab is similarly the return of John the Baptist.
... and the Primal Point as well.
Best wishes!
- Pat
kohli at ameritel.net
Susan Maneck
>(sigh) Please explain how 'Abdu'l Baha's interpretation of Mark is plagiarism
>- did 'Abdu'l Baha forget to point out that He was drawing from the Gospels?
Yeah, I was wondering about that one myself. ;-}
Susan Maneck
>> I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
>> Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
>
>Oldest trick in the book, Janis, to answer one question with another.
Dear Dermod,
It's the logical answer because it shows that Baha'is treat the Bible pretty
much the same way the New Testament treats the Old. Now one can argue that the
latter isn't valid either. But to accept one and reject the other makes no
sense at all.
warmest, Susan
reli...@yahoo.com
Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 9/11/03 2:33 am:
snip>
> Christ himself says John the Baptist is the return of Elijah (Elias) in
> the very Gospel you are accusing Baha'is of plagiarizing.
Jerry,
**Was** the return of Elijah, 2000 years ago. This has nothing to do
with, or has no connection whatsoever to the bab's claim in 1844.
>
> 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
> 11:15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
> (King James Bible, Matthew)
>
>> Unlike you Jerry and your religion which is trying to convince
>> gullible westerners the bab was a return of John the baptist, and
>> baha'u'llah was the return of Christ, like this bahai Joel Smith is
>> trying to do on his website.
>>
>> http://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/elijah.htm
>
> Thanks for link to the site. The Bab's role was that of John the
> Baptist, he returned in the same spirit of God as John the Baptist.
There is no verse, text or scripture in the christian gospels to say
John the baptist will return as a forerunner to the second coming of
christ. This is all oxymoronic bahai mumbo jumbo to try and interlink
christian prophesy with Islamic prophesy namely the forerunner to the
Madhi. Even 99.99999999999% of Sunni Muslims reject bahaism. The *bab*
prophesy only pertained to one small Shaykhi sect of shi'ite Islam.
Most Muslims (Sunni & Shi'ite's) believe the Bab & Baha'u'llah were
also false prophets IE: Madhi Freaks:
http://bahai-library.org/histories/abedi.html
>
>> You would agree, TRB is an unmoderated newsgroup were one can
>> challenge bahaism and bahai belief's without having your post
>> censored.
>>
>> So I ask you another question Jerry, (which I know you wont answer)
>> where did baha'u'llah say (in one of his writings) the bab is the
>> return of John the baptist. Remember you are the one defending the
>> bahai three central figures writings and tablets?
>
> This is from Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Pope. (Pope Pius IX)
>
> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
And Pope probably stuck it in the bin as a load of Islamic hogwash.
Interestingly enought, there is no make believe story about this
tablet, as there was about the tablet (letter) sent to Queen Victoria.
I wonder why?
>
> Read this together with Christ's saying John the Baptist was Elijah
> returned _for those who would believe it._ *If* you have ears to hear,
> then the Bab is similarly the return of John the Baptist.
Nonsense, there is no connection between between bahai writings and
text in the christian gospel. If you have eyes to read then read the
warnings of false prophets who will appear in many disguises in the
gospels.
"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many". Matthew
24:11
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but
inwardly they are ravening wolves". Matthew 7:15
"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive
you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall
deceive many". Matthew 24:4-5
"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall
shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they
shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before.
Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go
not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not".
Matthew 24:24-26
Errol
reli...@yahoo.com
Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 9/11/03 2:47 am:
> reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I never said the name of the bab has to be written in the gospels.
>> christians believe the second coming is to be the last judgement. A
>> forerunner like JTB to Christ's second coming is not necessary, and
>> neither is there any mention of a *forerunner* in the book of
>> revelation. The bab ( gate) concept comes from Islam as a
forerunner
>> to the Madhi. The way baha'is try and use equivocal language to
fit
>> this sh'ite Islamic/bahai prophesy into christian prophesy is
>> ludicrous......Errol
>
> First of all, I should thank you for bringing up a topic that actually
> pertains to the Baha'i Faith. Thanks! Its great to be discussing
> something substantive again.
Jerry
You are welcome, so long as the objective debate does not drift into
personal name calling. I am trying to stay clear of this from now on.
> Okay, here's what you said:
>
> reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Jerry why dont you prove to TRB readers and show us *ONE VERSE*
>> in the Gospels were it is prophesy John the Baptist will return
>> as the bab?
>
> So I asked you to show me the Old Testament verse where it prophesies
> Elijah will return as John the Baptist. You can't because it doesn't
> exist, yet Christ still said John the Baptist was Elijah. So your
> question is irrelevant because:
>
> If you believe in Christ, then you accept Christ's words that John the
> Baptist was Elijah.
Most Christians no doubt believe this, but the gospel verse pertained
to Christs deciples and followers at the time, as they were all Jews.
It is of little or no importance in todays teaching christianity,
unlike 2000 years ago when most converted early christians came from
Judaism. Its only baha'is who have Plagiarised the *John the Baptist
was Elijah* gospel verses to give authenticity to the bab's claim.
But the baha'is are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole in
this one. One proof that its an error of judgement (looking from a
christian perspective that is) is there is no record that John the
baptist will return a second time in the book of revelation. Surely
you must agree if such an important happening was to occur this would
be important news in the christian gospels. Secondly the bahai's shoot
themselves in the foot by giving the bab ( return of JTB) a high
station of "Manifestsation of God" yet they refuse to allocate an
equal station to JTB when he first came 2000 years ago. And a last
pointer which exposes error, bahai's believe Muhammad was the 1st
(return of Christ) in 622, how come no bab, forerunner or return of
John the Baptist arrived then?
>
> Same thing for Baha'u'llah, if you believe in Baha'u'llah, then you
> accept his words that the Bab was the return of John the Baptist.
Sure this is the accepted norm for baha'is, but only because most are
indoctrinated and have not done a proper investigation to seek the
truth.
Seeking the truth is not being indoctrinated without being allowed to
ask questions and think for
oneself..............................................Errol
Paul Hammond
> >
> >> I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
> >> Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
> >
> >Oldest trick in the book, Janis, to answer one question with another.
>
> Dear Dermod,
>
> It's the logical answer because it shows that Baha'is treat the Bible pretty
> much the same way the New Testament treats the Old. Now one can argue that the
> latter isn't valid either. But to accept one and reject the other makes no
> sense at all.
>
> warmest, Susan
>
Pat makes the argument better, but it's still a good argument
against Error's confusion.
I've made a good argument against Error elsewhere, but he
doesn't seem to have responded to it there. I thought
I'd leave the copy of his rubbish over here for others
to have a go at.
Paul
Paul Hammond
> Allahu Abha!
>
> Jerry Joplin wrote:
>
> > reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 8/11/03 8:31 pm:
> > >
> > >>I'll show it to you right after you show me *ONE VERSE* in the Old
> > >>Testament where it is prophesied Elijah will return as John the Baptist.
> > >
> > >
> > > But Jerry,
> > >
> > > I am not trying to prove or convince you or anyone on TRB or anywhere
> > > else John the Baptist was the return of Elijah. Its a *Plagiarism*
> > > used by Abdul Baha to promote the bab in the west.
>
> (sigh) Please explain how 'Abdu'l Baha's interpretation of Mark is plagiarism
> - did 'Abdu'l Baha forget to point out that He was drawing from the Gospels?
>
I don't think that Error really understands the words he throws
around here - it is like when he spelled something "oxmoronic",
and when he posts news articles that he himself hasn't read -
like an assertion that Dr Kelly has been called a traitor,
with a link that points to a page with tongue in cheek
suggestions for boy's names coming from sci-fi that
just happens to have the words "Dr", "Kelly" and "Traitor"
(one of my favourite episodes of the classic BBC series,
Blake's 7) appearing on the same page.
I have already pointed out to him that acknowledging
quoted sources is not plagiarising them. He hasn't
answered.
>
> I saw the Bab as a Manifestation of God, much like Blessed Jesus Christ.
> George posts things about the BF, but he was a Baha'i for a dozen or so years,
> and couldn't seem to asimmilate the basic stuff. I'm sure that there are some
> similarities between the Bab and John the Baptist, but the Essential Reality
> of the Bab was that He was a Manifestation of God, like Jesus Christ, the
> Baptist's Cousin.
>
> >
> > > You would agree, TRB is an unmoderated newsgroup were one can
> > > challenge bahaism and bahai belief's without having your post
> > > censored.
> > >
> > > So I ask you another question Jerry, (which I know you wont answer)
> > > where did baha'u'llah say (in one of his writings) the bab is the
> > > return of John the baptist. Remember you are the one defending the
> > > bahai three central figures writings and tablets?
> >
> > This is from Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Pope. (Pope Pius IX)
> >
> > "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> > who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> > (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
> >
>
> That is impressive!
>
> >
> > Read this together with Christ's saying John the Baptist was Elijah
> > returned _for those who would believe it._ *If* you have ears to hear,
> > then the Bab is similarly the return of John the Baptist.
>
> ... and the Primal Point as well.
>
Don't confuse Error by reminding him that the Bab was also
the return of Jesus, and the return of Muhammad as well
as the return of the spirit of John the Baptist. He's
still struggling with the basic Christian doctrines!
Paul
Susan Maneck
>Why don't you ask Jewish people if Christians were plagiarizing their
>scriptures by claiming John the Baptist was Elijah, or the Christ was
>the Son of Man?
>
Well, I guess you could say there is some plagiarism in the New Testament.
Words are put in Jesus' mouth that were originally said by Hillel, the founder
of the Pharisaic school.
reli...@yahoo.com
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 3:36 am:
> As it happens, the Gospel does contain prophecies of the return of
> Blessed Jesus Christ, and it contains interpretation of prior Biblical
> prophecies.
No one said it didnt, the objective challenge was about prophesies of
the return of John the Baptist, which there is no mention in the
Gospel.
Bahais have a habit of harping on that the Christian Trinity is man
made because there is no mention of it in the bible, so how then can
they justify to those from christians roots the bab was the return of
JTB?
Sounds a bit like our three central figures can chop & change prophesy
rules in other religions sacred scriptures when ever it suited them.
Nothing but the height of pretensiousness and very *MAN MADE* if you
ask me..
> Joel Smith did point out how some of the prophecies in the
> Old Testament were fulfilled in the New Testament.
He stared this at the bottom of his article.
"Joel Smith is a member of the Baha'i Faith living in Carbondale,
Southern Illinois in the United States. The opinions expressed in this
article constitute his own personal understanding and do not
necessarily represent the official position of the Baha'i Faith or its
teachings".
Joel is not very sure of himself is he? I wonder how many other
baha'is have different opinions which do not represent the official
position of the Baha'i Faith or its teachings on the bab being the
return of John the baptist? About 5
million?...............................Errol
reli...@yahoo.com
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 3:43 am:
>> This is from Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Pope. (Pope Pius IX)
>>
>> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The
Bab
>> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
>> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
>>
> That is impressive!
The Pope didn't think it was very impressive, and neither did all the
other Kings and VIP's baha'u'llah wrote to. I doubt if any of these
letters or tablets were ever read by the Pope, Kings or VIP's
I quess thats why the bahai's made up that lie about Queen Victoria
(passing a remark) to cover up the shame of baha'u'llah receiving no
replies ....................................Errol
Jerry Joplin
Thanks, but the credit should really go to Chad for his Ocean software.
It is amazing, its a relatively simple concept, but it never ceases to
amaze me the things you can find out from the Baha'i writings by using
Ocean, and how they relate to Christian, Jewish, Muslim, ... writings.
If you don't have it, its awesome! www.bahai-education.org.
Jerry
Jerry Joplin
> **Was** the return of Elijah, 2000 years ago. This has nothing to do
> with, or has no connection whatsoever to the bab's claim in 1844.
I don't think the Bab claimed he was John the Baptist, did he? If he
did, I can't find it. He does tell Mulla Husayn "I am the Bab" but it
seems the description of him as John the Baptist is first related by
Baha'u'llah. This is quite similar to John the Baptist saying he was
John, and Christ identifies him as the return of Elijah for those who
would *believe*.
> There is no verse, text or scripture in the christian gospels to say
> John the baptist will return as a forerunner to the second coming of
> christ. This is all oxymoronic bahai mumbo jumbo to try and interlink
> christian prophesy with Islamic prophesy namely the forerunner to the
> Madhi. Even 99.99999999999% of Sunni Muslims reject bahaism. The *bab*
> prophesy only pertained to one small Shaykhi sect of shi'ite Islam.
> Most Muslims (Sunni & Shi'ite's) believe the Bab & Baha'u'llah were
> also false prophets IE: Madhi Freaks:
> http://bahai-library.org/histories/abedi.html
The percentage of people accepting a belief is not a measure of the
truth of the belief. When Constantine came to power 320 years after
Christ, only 5% of the population in the Roman world were Christians.
Most Romans believed "Christus" was a superstition.
> And Pope probably stuck it in the bin as a load of Islamic hogwash.
> Interestingly enought, there is no make believe story about this
> tablet, as there was about the tablet (letter) sent to Queen Victoria.
> I wonder why?
And what did the Jewish high priest do with Christ's proclamation of
being the messiah? He had him executed. Well, at least we've
advanced some in our methods.
> Nonsense, there is no connection between between bahai writings and
> text in the christian gospel. If you have eyes to read then read the
> warnings of false prophets who will appear in many disguises in the
> gospels.
> "And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many". Matthew
> 24:11
>
> "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but
> inwardly they are ravening wolves". Matthew 7:15
>
> "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive
> you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall
> deceive many". Matthew 24:4-5
>
> "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall
> shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they
> shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before.
> Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go
> not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not".
> Matthew 24:24-26
I've posted the verses from 1st John several times that describe how to
identify false prophets. And Baha'u'llah is not a false prophet
according to the Christian scriptures! So, here it is:
"4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that
Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 4:3 And every spirit that
confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and
this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should
come; and even now already is it in the world."
(King James Bible, 1 John)
Baha'u'llah confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.
Jerry
Jerry Joplin
> You are welcome, so long as the objective debate does not drift into
> personal name calling. I am trying to stay clear of this from now on.
Thanks again, it doesn't seem necessary to call people names just
because they disagree with you.
> Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 9/11/03 2:47 am:
>>If you believe in Christ, then you accept Christ's words that John the
>>Baptist was Elijah.
>
> Most Christians no doubt believe this, but the gospel verse pertained
> to Christs deciples and followers at the time, as they were all Jews.
> It is of little or no importance in todays teaching christianity,
> unlike 2000 years ago when most converted early christians came from
> Judaism. Its only baha'is who have Plagiarised the *John the Baptist
> was Elijah* gospel verses to give authenticity to the bab's claim.
> But the baha'is are trying to fit a round peg into a square hole in
> this one. One proof that its an error of judgement (looking from a
> christian perspective that is) is there is no record that John the
> baptist will return a second time in the book of revelation. Surely
> you must agree if such an important happening was to occur this would
> be important news in the christian gospels. Secondly the bahai's shoot
> themselves in the foot by giving the bab ( return of JTB) a high
> station of "Manifestsation of God" yet they refuse to allocate an
> equal station to JTB when he first came 2000 years ago. And a last
> pointer which exposes error, bahai's believe Muhammad was the 1st
> (return of Christ) in 622, how come no bab, forerunner or return of
> John the Baptist arrived then?
No, I don't agree that it is necessary to see the return of John the
Baptist in Christian prophesy. Once you establish the belief that John
the Baptist was Elijah returned, then its quite natural to believe that
Elijah will return again, as John the Baptist, and then the Bab, perhaps
again with the next manifestation, but perhaps not. We don't know.
And he did return again in the Christian writings when Elijah and Moses
came to talk with Christ. So it seems logical to see Elijah coming in
the spirit of God as John the Baptist, or the Bab. His role is to turn
the hearts of humanity:
"1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to
turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to
the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."
(King James Bible, Luke)
Its not necessary either to have a gate for each manifestation, Moses
didn't have a John the Baptist either.
> Sure this is the accepted norm for baha'is, but only because most are
> indoctrinated and have not done a proper investigation to seek the
> truth.
> Seeking the truth is not being indoctrinated without being allowed to
> ask questions and think for
> oneself..............................................Errol
Its possible to indoctrinate people to accept beliefs, but in my case I
wasn't indoctrinated at all. I came to believe in Baha'u'llah. It is
accepted as norm *because* of a belief in Baha'u'llah. If anything
Baha'is indoctrinate less than other religions because it is stressed
that we learn of other religions, and work with them. Whereas some
Christians, Muslims, etc... believe it is a sin to entertain positive
thoughts about other religions.
Jerry
reli...@yahoo.com
Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 9/11/03 4:12 pm:
> reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> **Was** the return of Elijah, 2000 years ago. This has nothing to
do
>> with, or has no connection whatsoever to the bab's claim in 1844.
>
> I don't think the Bab claimed he was John the Baptist, did he? If he
> did, I can't find it.
Ofcourse you cant find it Jerry, because this Shi'ite muslim 羨li
Muhammad had no intention of expanding his new group and their
followers outside of Persia, never mind to the Christian west. His
declaration in 1844 羨li Muhammad proclaimed himself to be a bab
(gate) to the Hidden Imam was only for shi'ite Muslim ears. The John
the Baptist myth was added later by Baha'u'llah when they kicked him
out of Iran for Islamic apostacy. Baha'u'llah and his son Abdul Baha
then decided a different angle to con naive westerners like you and
me into joining bahaism. There are mugs born every minute and you and
I fell hook line and sinker for the oxymoronic bahai double speak. You
would think the central figures in Babi/Bahaism would be singing from
the same hymn sheet on something as important as the bab being the
return of John the Baptist.. But no, all are false prophets warbling
out of tune with each other under different lode trees from Terahan to
Baghdad to Haifa.
Errol
Randy Burns
example: Moses, Miriam and Aaron. John the Baptist, Virgin Mary, Jesus.
Muhammad, Fatima, Ali. The Bab, Tahirih, Baha'u'llah.
Cheers, Randy
--
"Jerry Joplin" <Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com> wrote in message
news:vqsqc4h...@corp.supernews.com...
MOST@btinternet.com Dermod Ryder
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031109090309...@mb-m03.aol.com...
> >
> >Why don't you ask Jewish people if Christians were plagiarizing their
> >scriptures by claiming John the Baptist was Elijah, or the Christ was
> >the Son of Man?
> >
>
> Well, I guess you could say there is some plagiarism in the New Testament.
> Words are put in Jesus' mouth that were originally said by Hillel, the
founder
> of the Pharisaic school.
Another Manifestation who copied his ideas from somebody else?
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> in article 3FADB635...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 3:36 am:
>
> > As it happens, the Gospel does contain prophecies of the return of
> > Blessed Jesus Christ, and it contains interpretation of prior Biblical
> > prophecies.
>
> No one said it didnt, the objective challenge was about prophesies of
> the return of John the Baptist, which there is no mention in the
> Gospel.
So? I'm afraid you've missed the point of the Gospel. The Gospel is about
the Blessed Jesus Christ. Mention of John the Baptist in the Gospel, is due
to his relationship with Jesus Christ. Thus I say, the Person whose return
is prophesied in the Gospel is Blessed Jesus Christ, rather than John the
Baptist.
>
> Bahais have a habit of harping on that the Christian Trinity is man
> made
I am a Baha'i. Though I do respond to blasphemous assertions, I don't feel
like I habitually harp on them when they are not being falsely asserted. I
don't see how this relates to the lack of some prophecy in the Gospel about
the return of John the Baptist.
> because there is no mention of it in the bible, so how then can
> they justify to those from christians roots the bab was the return of
> JTB?
>
It really doesn't matter at all for a Christian to accept the Bab as the
return of John the Baptist. I see the Bab as the return of Blessed Jesus
Christ, rather than the return of John the Baptist. That is really
tangential to introducing people to Baha'u'llah. Baha'u'llah is the Prophet
Founder of the BF. Baha'u'llah is the Manifestation of God for this age.
In my mind, trying to insist that the Bab is _only_ the return of John the
Baptist, might be degrading His station of Manifestation of God, if it turns
out that the Baptist was not a Manifestation of God. I believe that the
point that Baha'u'llah was making was that the Bab was His Herald.
>
> Sounds a bit like our three central figures can chop & change prophesy
> rules in other religions sacred scriptures when ever it suited them.
Examples?
>
> Nothing but the height of pretensiousness and very *MAN MADE* if you
> ask me..
>
Let me know when I ask you how you feel about things you have not
documented.
>
> > Joel Smith did point out how some of the prophecies in the
> > Old Testament were fulfilled in the New Testament.
>
> He stared this at the bottom of his article.
>
> "Joel Smith is a member of the Baha'i Faith living in Carbondale,
> Southern Illinois in the United States. The opinions expressed in this
> article constitute his own personal understanding and do not
> necessarily represent the official position of the Baha'i Faith or its
> teachings".
>
> Joel is not very sure of himself is he? I wonder how many other
> baha'is have different opinions which do not represent the official
> position of the Baha'i Faith or its teachings on the bab being the
> return of John the baptist? About 5
> million?...............................Errol
This question of how OT prophecies are fulfilled in the NT, really isn't a
Baha'i issue so much as it is a Christian issue. I've showed repeatedly for
our Christian audience how some Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in
the New Testament. Many are not fulffilled physically.
xxxx From previous message xxxxxxxxxxxx
There is one and only one Biblical way to interpret prophecy, and I
don't say this on my own; the Bible says, "First of all you must
understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's
own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of
man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."
http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV2&byte=5503919
So, the same Holy Spirit Who moved men to prophesy these things in
advance, also interpreted the fulfillment of these prophesies. Again, I
don't make this up. I provide Biblical examples.
I call your attention to Isaiah 40, verse 3 and 4:
" A voice cries: In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD, make
straight in the desert a highway for our God. Every valley shall be
lifted up, and every mountain and hill be made low; the uneven ground
shall become level, and the rough places a plain."
...
On a _literal_ basis, the passage
seems to be saying that there will be a physical highway through the
desert, straight and flat, with the hills leveled and the gulleys
filled. This sort of thing would be expensive to do with modern
earthmoving equipment. Back in the day, .... well ... really quite a
sign. On a spiritual level, one might say that a man will cut past the
station of lay people and clergy, and point out, for the ignorant, to
the Word of God in the flesh. At this point, just with what we have,
neither of these interpretations has much credence, yet.
I call your attention to Joel 2:28-31
"And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit on
all flesh; your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men
shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions. Even upon the
menservants and maidservants in those days, I will pour out my spirit.
And I will give portents in the heavens and on the earth, blood and fire
and columns of smoke. The sun shall be turned to darkness, and the moon
to blood, before the great and terrible day of the LORD comes."
Wow, _Biblical_ events! The earth being flattened out - the sun
darkened and the moon turned to _blood_! Just imagine if we were two
pharisees, back in NT times. We are the priveleged because we can read
the texts. The masses are all worked up about these itenerant
preachers, were their dirty beards and their stinky clothes. We tell
them, "this is not the end times - we would know if the Messiah, or
Elijah were here"! For crying out loud, even a blind man could figure
out when the sun went dark!
Yet, the Bible describes how these prophesies were fulfilled in the days
of the New Testament, even how the pharisees were oblivious. These
interpretations, the ones _in_ the New Testament, are the
interpretations of prophecy _by_ the Holy Spirit. Given that scripture
is needed to correctly interpret the prophecies of scripture, Christians
have a big advantage over the Pharisees in that they _have_ the
fulfillment and the validated interpretations right there in their
Bible. So, let's see how these Biblical prophecies, of flattened earth,
blooded moon, and darkened sun, _were_ already fulfilled in the New
Testament!
Isaiah's verses are fulfilled in Mathew 3:1-3:
"In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of
Judea, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." For this is he
who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said, "The voice of one
crying in the wilderness:
Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." And, again, in
Matthew 11:10-11 "This is he of whom it is written, `Behold, I send my
messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way before thee.'Truly,
I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one greater
than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is
greater than he."
Wow, imagine that, John was making the highway straight, w/o an
earthmover. I guess _the_Bible_ shows that not all prophecies are to be
interpreted _physically_, or in a manner we might expect from a literal
reading.
Joel's verses were fulfilled in Acts 2:14-17:
"But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed
them, "Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to
you, and give ear to my words. For these men are not drunk, as you
suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day; but this is what
was spoken by the prophet Joel: `And in the last days it shall be, God
declares, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons
and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions,
and your old men shall dream dreams;"
What I said about the verse from Isaiah, regarding the literal
straightening of the earth, would seem to apply equally to the literal
blackening of the sun, and the moon literally turning to blood. It is
not as plain as it might be read.
Enough of examples on the principles of Biblical interpretation. Here
is a case where the _literal_ reading _is_ the correct reading, a
prophecy of a woman giving birth to a baby boy.
The Old Testament Prophecy
Isaiah 7:13-17
"And he said, "Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to
weary men, that you weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will
give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son,
and shall call his name Imman'u-el. He shall eat curds and honey when
he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the
child knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land before
whose two kings you are in dread will be deserted. The LORD will bring
upon you and upon your people and upon your father's house such days as
have not come since the day that E'phraim departed from Judah -- the
king of Assyria."
The fulfillment of that Prophecy
Matthew 1:20-23
But as he considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him
in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do
not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is
of the Holy Spirit; she will bear a son, and you shall call his name
Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins." All this took
place to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: "Behold, a
virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
and his name shall be called Emmanuel" (which means, God with us).
A New Testament Prophecy
Revelation 12:1-2
And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun,
with the moon under her feet, and on her head a
crown of twelve stars; she was with child and she cried out in her pangs
of birth, in anguish for delivery.
The Biblical Interpretation of the New Testament Prophecy
A woman will give birth to a Son, and He will be 'God with us'.
Yet Another Old Testament Prophecy
Malachi 4:5
"Behold, I will send you Eli'jah the prophet before the great and
terrible day of the LORD comes."
Yet another NT Fulfillment
Matthew 11:13-15
"For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John; and if you are
willing to accept it, he is Eli'jah who is to come. He who has ears to
hear, let him hear."
In several places the New Testament promises the return of Jesus
Christ. Since we have the example of Malachi, concerning Elijah and
John, we are in no position to insist that Jesus Christ be physically
the same, even any more the same Person, than John the Baptist was the
same person as Elijah. Since we accept the New Testament, we should be
willing to circumsize our hearts, no joke, and accept that things need
not be izzactly as someone may have already visualized it for us with a
striaght through reading of Revelations, punctuated by Bible thumping,
and comments that it will _physically_ come to pass izzactly as
literally spelled out, so no need to worry about 1844, had it happened,
we'd've knowed! OR whatever the Pharisees told the crowd two thousand
years ago or so.
I hope this helps, George.
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> in article 3FADB7C7...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 3:43 am:
>
> >> This is from Baha'u'llah's Tablet to the Pope. (Pope Pius IX)
> >>
> >> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The
> Bab
> >> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> >> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
> >>
> > That is impressive!
>
> The Pope didn't think it was very impressive, and neither did all the
> other Kings and VIP's baha'u'llah wrote to.
I was impressed, though. You've got some tangential detail in mind,
about the Bab and an association with John the Baptist. You ask Jerry,
while loudly claiming that he won't answer. He answers, and you want to
go on about some tangential nonsense.
<>> So I ask you another question Jerry, (which I know you wont answer)
<>> where did baha'u'llah say (in one of his writings) the bab is the
<>> return of John the baptist. Remember you are the one defending the
<>> bahai three central figures writings and tablets?
What was your point - that Baha'u'llah saw similarities between the Bab
and John the Baptist?
I've got a challenge for you, George. Cast about in the writings of the
Bab, Baha'u'llah, and/or 'Abdu'l Baha. See if you can find some
allegation of a _prohecy_ being in the _New_Testament_or_Gospels_, that
John the Baptist would return.
> I doubt if any of these
> letters or tablets were ever read by the Pope, Kings or VIP's
>
So what? They were mailed.
>
> I quess thats why the bahai's made up that lie about Queen Victoria
> (passing a remark) to cover up the shame of baha'u'llah receiving no
> replies ....................................Errol
Ahhhhh, so, if someone doesn't reply to what someone writes, do you see
that as shame?
How about charging someone w/ plagiarism, and not substantiating the
charge - what do you say about that?
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> (snip) A
> forerunner like JTB to Christ's second coming is not necessary, and
> neither is there any mention of a *forerunner* in the book of
> revelation.
You are mistaken.
"And I will grant my two witnesses power to
prophesy for one thousand two hundred and
sixty days, clothed in sackcloth." These are
the two olive trees and the two lampstands
which stand before the Lord of the earth.
And if any one would harm them, fire pours
out from their mouth and consumes their foes;
if any one would harm them, thus he is doomed
to be killed. They have power to shut the sky,
that no rain may fall during the days of their
prophesying, and they have power over the
waters to turn them into blood, and to smite the
earth with every plague, as often as they desire.
And when they have finished their testimony,
the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit
will make war upon them and conquer them
and kill them, and their dead bodies will lie in
the street of the great city which is allegorically
called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was
crucified. For three days and a half men from
the peoples and tribes and tongues and nations
gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them
be placed in a tomb, and those who dwell on the
earth will rejoice over them and make merry and
exchange presents, because these two prophets
had been a torment to those who dwell on the
earth. But after the three and a half days a breath
of life from God entered them, and they stood up
on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw
them. Then they heard a loud voice from heaven
saying to them, "Come up hither!" And in the sight
of their foes they went up to heaven in a cloud."
http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=5534755
Rev 11:3-12 is even more elaborate than the passage in Malachi concerning
Elijah's heralding of the Day of God.
> The bab ( gate) concept comes from Islam as a forerunner
> to the Madhi.
You are mistaken. The gates were not forerunners to the Mahdi, they were
intermediaries between the Twelver community, and the hidden Imam.
"Mr. Hoshyar: During the short occultation people in general were deprived
of a more normal contact with the Imam. However, the relationship was not
completely severed. It was maintained through some special individuals
known as bab ('mediator'), na'ib ('deputy'), and wakil ('representative').
It was through these individuals that the people established contact with
their Imam, asking questions of him and seeking his assistance in their
affairs. The share of the Imam from the khums (the 'fifth') was delivered
to the Imam through his deputy. Sometimes, they used to ask for material
help from the Imam; at other times they used to seek permission to go for
hajj or other kinds of travel; still at other times they would ask the Imam
to pray for their sick or to pray for a child for them. The Imam used to
respond to these requests through different individuals who represented him
among them in different parts of the Muslim world. In the performance of
all these tasks there were specific individuals who executed the will of
the Imam. There were times when the requests were made in letters to the
Imam and, accordingly, he would respond in writing. These 'signed notes'
from him were known as tawqi'."
http://www.balagh.net/english/ahl_bayt/imam_mahdi/06.htm
> The way baha'is try and use equivocal language to fit
> this sh'ite Islamic/bahai prophesy into christian prophesy is
> ludicrous.
Your entitled to your opinions, of course, but the 'fact' of no forerunner
in the book of Revelation, and the 'fact' that the Bab is a Muslim
forerunner to the Mahdi, appear to simply be fabrications which have no
factual basis. Thus, your opinion on these matters is ludicrous to me.
Paul Hammond
> in article vqspjap...@corp.supernews.com, Jerry Joplin at
> Je...@JerryJoplinNoSchpamm.com wrote on 9/11/03 4:12 pm:
>
> > reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> **Was** the return of Elijah, 2000 years ago. This has nothing to
> do
> >> with, or has no connection whatsoever to the bab's claim in 1844.
> >
> > I don't think the Bab claimed he was John the Baptist, did he? If he
> > did, I can't find it.
>
> Muhammad had no intention of expanding his new group and their
> followers outside of Persia, never mind to the Christian west. His
> (gate) to the Hidden Imam was only for shi'ite Muslim ears.
The Bab was more esoteric, and tended to reserve his greater
claims for his more advanced pupils (read "Peter Smith's
The Babi and Baha'i Religions for further details).
The Bab *began* by making claims to *merely* be a gate to
the Imams, but as his time went on, he made greater and
greater claims, eventually resulting in his claim
to be the "Primal Point" - the bearer of an independent
religion, and an authority in his own right as great
as Muhammad.
This is an idea that would be blasphemy to any orthodox
Shi'i.
The John
> the Baptist myth was added later by Baha'u'llah when they kicked him
> out of Iran for Islamic apostacy.
By the end of the Bab's ministry he had made much greater
claims than to merely be the return of John the Baptist.
He claimed to be the equivalent of Muhammad, a new and
independent prophet.
Baha'u'llah and his son Abdul Baha
> then decided a different angle to con naive westerners like you and
> me into joining bahaism.
Sez you. I think they had a totally different and much less
cynical aim.
There are mugs born every minute and you and
> I fell hook line and sinker for the oxymoronic bahai double speak.
At least you've learned to spell this word now. Do you actually
know what it means yet?
You
> would think the central figures in Babi/Bahaism would be singing from
> the same hymn sheet on something as important as the bab being the
> return of John the Baptist..
As indeed they are.
But no, all are false prophets warbling
> out of tune with each other under different lode trees from Terahan to
> Baghdad to Haifa.
>
>
Wow! You've enlightened me so much Error.
Paul
Jerry Joplin
> Ofcourse you cant find it Jerry, because this Shi'ite muslim ‘Ali
> Muhammad had no intention of expanding his new group and their
> followers outside of Persia, never mind to the Christian west. His
> (gate) to the Hidden Imam was only for shi'ite Muslim ears. The John
> the Baptist myth was added later by Baha'u'llah when they kicked him
> out of Iran for Islamic apostacy. Baha'u'llah and his son Abdul Baha
> then decided a different angle to con naive westerners like you and
> me into joining bahaism. There are mugs born every minute and you and
> I fell hook line and sinker for the oxymoronic bahai double speak. You
> would think the central figures in Babi/Bahaism would be singing from
> the same hymn sheet on something as important as the bab being the
> return of John the Baptist.. But no, all are false prophets warbling
> out of tune with each other under different lode trees from Terahan to
> Baghdad to Haifa.
I could say the same thing about John the Baptist. He never proclaimed
himself the return of Elijah, Christ did. In fact, John the Baptist
denied he was Elijah. Also, John the Baptist never wanted to spread his
message beyond the Jewish people either. The parallels are amazing. I
can imagine some 1st/2nd century gentiles saying "this is an angle to
con Greeks into believing in a Jewish God. They are false prophets to
Zeus and the pantheon."
Jerry
>
> Errol
>
> http://www.bahai-religion.org/history_babism.htm
Susan Maneck
>Another Manifestation who copied his ideas from somebody else?
>
Manifestations don't have to be original, Dermod. They can select whatever They
want.
reli...@yahoo.com
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 11:34 pm:
> It really doesn't matter at all for a Christian to accept the Bab as the
> return of John the Baptist.
Your contradictions catch you out again, or is it your brand of mumbo
jumbo double speak Pat? If what you say is the truth, why did
baha'u'llah send this message in his tablet to the Pope, which in a
recent post you congratulated Jerry for finding it and said it was
*impressive*?
"O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
(Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
> I see the Bab as the return of Blessed Jesus Christ, rather than the
>return of John the Baptist. That is really tangential to
introducing people
>to Baha'u'llah.
Sure you do, if you read what Robert Stockman says about Abdul Baha's
prophesy prediction and interpretation of the Book of revelation when
he contradicts bahau'llah's above writing by saying the bab along with
baha'u'llah and muhammad were all three woes or returns of Christ.
http://bahai-library.org/unpubl.articles/apostle.html
Surely the bab cant be both the return of christ and the return of
John the baptist at the same time, can he?
"Verse 11:14 refers to three woes, which 'Abdu'l_Bahá identifies with
Muammad, the Báb, and Bahá'u'lláh; He explains that the coming of a
new Manifestation of God signifies judgment of the people, and thus
constitutes a woe. He reinforces His interpretation by citing Ezekiel
30:1_3".
Now (with the use of baha'u'llah and abdul baha's own words) we can
see the other side of the sweet little Islamic/babi/bahai prophesy
forcasting con trick. We can also see were the seeds were born for
oxymoronic double speak when bahai's try to rely and explain bahaism
to westerners using contradictions from their central figures writings
when claiming who the bab and baha'u'llah are supposed to represent in
the christian west.
> Baha'u'llah is the Prophet Founder of the BF. Baha'u'llah is the
> Manifestation of God for this age.
Sure he is, but himself and the bab were both prophet founders of man
made Islamic based cults of babi/bahaism which may have a message for
middle eastern Muslims, but not for the majority with christian roots
in the west.
> In my mind, trying to insist that the Bab is _only_ the return of John the
> Baptist, might be degrading His station of Manifestation of God, if it turns
> out that the Baptist was not a Manifestation of God. I believe that the
> point that Baha'u'llah was making was that the Bab was His Herald.
What you are trying to do Pat is make excuses for your central figures
contradictions. Or to put it bluntly make a silk purse out of a sows
lug, but you shot your self in the foot trying to do so.
Errol
reli...@yahoo.com
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 11:35 pm:
> I've got a challenge for you, George. Cast about in the writings of the
> Bab, Baha'u'llah, and/or 'Abdu'l Baha. See if you can find some
> allegation of a _prohecy_ being in the _New_Testament_or_Gospels_, that John the Baptist would return.
There is no written prophesy (not that I know of) that JTB will
return in the gospels prior to the second coming of Christ. Why then
(thanks to Jerry) did baha'u'llah write the following to the Pope if
there is no truth to it?
"O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
(Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
Its obvious from the above tablet to the Pope, baha'u'llah's
Sufi/Shi'ite/Islamic mindset was trying to convince the Vatican leader
or the RC Church of the **interlinkage ** of muslim prophesy concepts
into a christian one. Like trying to fit a round peg into a square
hole. The Pope knew It didnt work. and it was a false claim .Thats the
obvious reason why he never answered baha'u'llah's letter.
Errol
Paul Hammond
> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
>
> Its obvious from the above tablet to the Pope, baha'u'llah's
> Sufi/Shi'ite/Islamic mindset was trying to convince the Vatican leader
> or the RC Church of the **interlinkage ** of muslim prophesy concepts
> into a christian one.
That is indeed obvious.
From a Baha'i/Muslim perspective, it makes perfect sense - since
there is only one God, who is always sending various messengers
to humanity - and the difference between messengers is merely
due to the difference between times and places and customs
of the people who receive the messengers. (You understand,
I talk from the Baha'i perspective here, right?)
In writing to a Christian Pope, obviously it makes sense for
Baha'u'llah to refer to the Christian message, which would
be the one that has meaning for such a person.
Like trying to fit a round peg into a square
> hole. The Pope knew It didnt work. and it was a false claim .
Wow! Your mindreading talents are improving day by day.
Not only can you read Baha'u'llah's mind, but also the
mind of a long-dead 19th century pontiff! Amazing!
All we know is that no reply was forthcoming.
Thats the
> obvious reason why he never answered baha'u'llah's letter.
>
I think that you are reading much that you cannot possibly
know into this fact. The Pope never replied. How would
you know exactly what he thought? Maybe Baha'u'llah's
claim played on his mind night after night. Maybe he
threw the letter straight into the trash bin without
a second thought. We will never know.
Baha'u'llah's claim played on your mind impressively
enough to convince you to join the Baha'i Faith for
more than a decade. It's just a shame you didn't
try to find out more about your faith before you
left it.
Paul
Paul Hammond
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 11:34 pm:
>
> > It really doesn't matter at all for a Christian to accept the Bab as the
> > return of John the Baptist.
>
> Your contradictions catch you out again, or is it your brand of mumbo
> jumbo double speak Pat? If what you say is the truth, why did
> baha'u'llah send this message in his tablet to the Pope, which in a
> recent post you congratulated Jerry for finding it and said it was
> *impressive*?
>
Because *you* claimed that Baha'u'llah himself had never claimed
that the Bab was "the return of John the Baptist". A false
claim, directly contradicted by this quote:
> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
>
> > I see the Bab as the return of Blessed Jesus Christ, rather than the
> >return of John the Baptist. That is really tangential to
> introducing people
> >to Baha'u'llah.
>
> Sure you do, if you read what Robert Stockman says about Abdul Baha's
> prophesy prediction and interpretation of the Book of revelation when
> he contradicts bahau'llah's above writing by saying the bab along with
> baha'u'llah and muhammad were all three woes or returns of Christ.
> http://bahai-library.org/unpubl.articles/apostle.html
> Surely the bab cant be both the return of christ and the return of
> John the baptist at the same time, can he?
>
Yes he can, Error, and we've already explained this to you
about a hundred times.
>
> > In my mind, trying to insist that the Bab is _only_ the return of John the
> > Baptist, might be degrading His station of Manifestation of God, if it turns
> > out that the Baptist was not a Manifestation of God. I believe that the
> > point that Baha'u'llah was making was that the Bab was His Herald.
>
> What you are trying to do Pat is make excuses for your central figures
> contradictions. Or to put it bluntly make a silk purse out of a sows
> lug, but you shot your self in the foot trying to do so.
>
Pat has not shot himself in the foot. Not here.
ANd, he isn't in the habit of shooting himself in the
foot so often as you.
Explain, will you please, how the fact that a seventies
sci-fi series having an episode called "Traitor" is
evidence of your claim that serious newspapers called
Dr Kelly a traitor before you did.
Paul
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> in article 3FAECF24...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 11:35 pm:
>
> > I've got a challenge for you, George. Cast about in the writings of the
> > Bab, Baha'u'llah, and/or 'Abdu'l Baha. See if you can find some
> > allegation of a _prohecy_ being in the _New_Testament_or_Gospels_, that John the Baptist would return.
>
> There is no written prophesy (not that I know of) that JTB will
> return in the gospels prior to the second coming of Christ.
Great, then we are all done with that snipe hunt!
> Why then
> (thanks to Jerry) did baha'u'llah write the following to the Pope if
> there is no truth to it?
>
> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
>
I think there _is_ some truth to it, and your snipe hunt about no NT prophecy regarding the return of John
the Baptist, is a step or so beyond what Baha'u'llah told the Pope.
>
> Its obvious from the above tablet to the Pope, baha'u'llah's
> Sufi/Shi'ite/Islamic mindset was trying to convince the Vatican leader
> or the RC Church of the **interlinkage ** of muslim prophesy concepts
> into a christian one.
I missed that. I just did not see the part where He says, "Muslim prophecies and Christian prophecies are
linked". Mind you, it is a suspicion which I've certainly held, but, I had not noticed, until you just now
called my attention to it, that it is not mentioned in the sentence you quoted.
> Like trying to fit a round peg into a square
> hole. The Pope knew It didnt work. and it was a false claim .
That god had sent another Herald? That was not even the point, again!
> Thats the
> obvious reason why he never answered baha'u'llah's letter.
Maybe. Maybe the Pope just didn't figure that Baha'u'llah was the Manifestation of God, or, maybe the Pope
thought it might adversely effect his pension plan if he gave the question much thought.
MOST@btinternet.com Dermod Ryder
> >
> >Another Manifestation who copied his ideas from somebody else?
> >
>
> Manifestations don't have to be original, Dermod. They can select whatever
They
> want.
Which makes it a syncretistic BF.
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> in article 3FAECEF7...@ameritel.net, Pat Kohli at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 9/11/03 11:34 pm:
>
> > It really doesn't matter at all for a Christian to accept the Bab as the
> > return of John the Baptist.
>
> Your contradictions catch you out again, or is it your brand of mumbo
> jumbo double speak Pat?
I think the contradictions were yours.
Previously you had written, and then deleted from my response:
>>> Bahais have a habit of harping on that the Christian Trinity is man
>>> made
and I pointed out that harping on the doctrine of Trinity is _not_ a _habit_
though I am a Baha'i.
Do you have some contradiction in mind?
> If what you say is the truth, why did
> baha'u'llah send this message in his tablet to the Pope,
Baha'u'llah wanted to inform the Pope that his Lord had returned.
> which in a
> recent post you congratulated Jerry for finding it and said it was
> *impressive*?
>
> "O people of the Son! We have sent unto you John the Baptist (The Bab
> who was the precursor of Baha) another time."
> (Compilations, Baha'i Scriptures, p. 102)
>
> > I see the Bab as the return of Blessed Jesus Christ, rather than the
> >return of John the Baptist. That is really tangential to
> introducing people
> >to Baha'u'llah.
>
Ah, I see I've already given you my $0.02 on the quotation.
>
> Sure you do, if you read what Robert Stockman says about Abdul Baha's
> prophesy prediction and interpretation of the Book of revelation when
> he contradicts bahau'llah's above writing by saying the bab along with
> baha'u'llah and muhammad were all three woes or returns of Christ.
> http://bahai-library.org/unpubl.articles/apostle.html
So what?
>
> Surely the bab cant be both the return of christ and the return of
> John the baptist at the same time, can he?
>
Just as Blessed Jesus can be the Lamb of God, a Prophet like Moses, the Son of
David, etc.
>
> "Verse 11:14
Revelation 11? That reminds me of certain mumbo jumbo double talk.
Someone was alleging
>>> (snip) A
>>> forerunner like JTB to Christ's second coming is not necessary, and
>>> neither is there any mention of a *forerunner* in the book of
>>> revelation.
Can you imagine that? Someone like yourself, well read in various facets of
Revelation 11, would immediately see the falsity of that, no?
> refers to three woes, which 'Abdu'l_Bahá identifies with
> Muammad, the Báb, and Bahá'u'lláh; He explains that the coming of a
> new Manifestation of God signifies judgment of the people, and thus
> constitutes a woe. He reinforces His interpretation by citing Ezekiel
> 30:1_3".
>
> Now (with the use of baha'u'llah and abdul baha's own words) we can
> see the other side of the sweet little Islamic/babi/bahai prophesy
> forcasting con trick. We can also see
Whoa whoa whoa! Not so fast. What con trick are you referring to?
> were the seeds were born for
> oxymoronic double speak when bahai's try to rely and explain bahaism
> to westerners using contradictions from their central figures writings
What contradictions? That the Bab was the Gate of God, does not contradict Him
from being the Primal Point, certainly no more than Jesus' being the Son of God
contradicts Him being the Son of David.
>
> when claiming who the bab and baha'u'llah are supposed to represent in
> the christian west.
>
Aren't they both presented as Manifestations of God, to both Occidentals and
Orientals? Even the Christians who would criticize the BF, have figured out that
the Bab was a Manifestation of God, in Baha'i eyes.
---- a Chrisian reflection on the BF -----
The Baha'i faith has become a popular religion in an environment of ecumenism,
inclusiveness and political correctness. (snip)
Baha'i was started in 1844 when Mizra Ali Muhammad ("the Bab" or gate) proclaimed
he was the greatest manifestation of God yet to appear. The Bab is purported to
be a direct descendant of Muhammad and he claimed to be the fulfillment of the
scriptures of all of the world's religions. During his brief 6 year ministry, he
taught of another manifestation that would follow (similar to the role of John the
Baptist). This manifestation would be even greater than he, and in 1863 Mirza
Husayn Ali proclaimed that he was the Great prophet the Bab had spoken of.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.contenderministries.org/bahai.php
------ Baha'i procalmation material for Hindus ------
Many prodigies and wonders are recorded of all of the Avatars or Manifestations of
God. This was also the case with Baha'u'llah. On one occasion, while still a
child, he appeared before the Shah to argue a case on behalf of his father.
When Baha'u'llah was a young man, there arose in Iran a movement begun by another
young Iranian called the Bab. This was called the Babi movement. It holds a very
special place in Baha'i history. This is because Baha'u'llah regarded the Bab as
an Avatar and considered the Babi movement to be the forerunner of the Baha'i
Faith. As a result, Baha'is date the start of their religion from the year in
which the Bab announced his mission, 1844 AD (5065 of the Shri Krishna Samvat;
1900 of the Vikram Samvat). One of the first prominent disciples of the Bab was
an Indian and several other Indians are recorded as having joined the movement.
http://www.northill.demon.co.uk/hinduism/ch8.htm
>
> > Baha'u'llah is the Prophet Founder of the BF. Baha'u'llah is the
> > Manifestation of God for this age.
>
> Sure he is, but himself and the bab were both prophet founders of man
> made Islamic based cults of babi/bahaism which may have a message for
> middle eastern Muslims, but not for the majority with christian roots
> in the west.
>
sez U. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. When your facts are in order, someone
might be interested in your opinion.
>
> > In my mind, trying to insist that the Bab is _only_ the return of John the
> > Baptist, might be degrading His station of Manifestation of God, if it turns
> > out that the Baptist was not a Manifestation of God. I believe that the
> > point that Baha'u'llah was making was that the Bab was His Herald.
>
> What you are trying to do Pat is make excuses for your central figures
> contradictions.
If you insist that the Manifestation of God can only be the Manifestation of God,
and not the return of anyone, and not have any other title, it would seem like a
contradiction to you. Many others, though, consider that to be a Manifestation of
God, One would reconcile various things that otherwise seem to head off into
opposite directions.
> Or to put it bluntly make a silk purse out of a sows
> lug, but you shot your self in the foot trying to do so.
sez U.
Pat Kohli
reli...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Dear friends & newcomers to TRB
>
> inclosed is an example of islamic/bahai plagiarism from the Christian
> gospel
I'm sorry. One at a time, please. Where is an example of plagiarism from
the Christian Gospel? I believe I've been asking for this in other
messages in this thread. Where is it?
> coupled with their oxymoronic double speak to deceive ignorant
> westerners (not well read in the Christian bible) into believing that
> the *Most Great guidance* was Husayn-`Ali Nuri, a Persian Sufi shi'ite
> muslim (1817-1892) renamed Baha'u'llah (founder of bahaism) instead of
> the gospel of Jesus Christ (founder of Christianity).
>
> "It is stated in the blessed Gospel: Travel ye toward the East and
> toward the West and enlighten the people with the light of the Most
> Great Guidance, so that they may take a portion and share of eternal
> life.[Cf. Mark 16:15.]" 1 TABLET TO THE Bahá'íS OF THE NORTHEASTERN
> STATES http://bahai-library.org/writings/abdulbaha/tdp/sec-2.html
>
> Examples of their cultish outlandish mystical tosh are published in
> these bahai phamplets. http://www.stonehaven-press.com/index.htm
>
Here is one:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE GLORY OF CHRIST: A Bahá’í Testimony
The Glory of Christ: A Bahá’í Testimony addresses the single most
pressing question to confront any Christian investigating the claims of
Bahá’u’lláh, founder of the Bahá’í Faith: Since the Bible affirms that
Jesus
Christ is eternally “the Way, the Truth and the Life” through whom alone
we may approach God, how can any Christian ever accept Bahá’u’lláh and
the Bahá’í teaching of progressive revelation?
The answer – fully documented here from Christian scripture – is that
Christ
is infinitely more than the historical human personality known as Jesus
of
Nazareth. The Christ of the Bible is the pre-existent Presence of God,
that
“life-giving spirit” of Divinity (I Cor. 15:45) which became manifest in
the
historical Jesus. It is this eternal Christ-spirit of which John writes,
“In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God” (John 1:1), and of which Paul says, “He is the firstborn of every
creature: For by Him were all things created . . . He is before all
things, and
by Him all things consist” (Col. 1:15-17). It is, Bahá’ís believe, this
same
Divine Spirit “whose goings forth have been from of old, from
everlasting”
(Micah 5:2), and who has in our day reappeared in the person of
Bahá’u’lláh.
From this perspective, there is only one Christ – infinitely glorious,
absolutely
unique and utterly indispensable as the only path to God. This pamphlet
demonstrates the truly Christ-centered nature of the Bahá’í Faith and the
harmony of the Bible with Bahá’í teachings.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.stonehaven-press.com/gc.htm
Stunning!
>
> Newcomers to the Bahai Faith will find it hard to come upon any
> literature on this religion other than the hagiography the Bahai Faith
> have censored and published themselves free on the internet.
>
Yet, if this were so, how would you find this:
>
> Excellent books such as "Modernity and Milennium" by Juan Cole
> http://bahai-library.org/reviews/cole.modernity.html
... or this ...
>
> And "Resurrection and Renewal" by Abbas Amanat are indeed scholarly
> and non-hagiographical
> http://www.weiserantiquarian.com/cgi-bin/wab455/9146.html
>
?
> but they still have to be purchased and may not be available in every
> University or local library especially outside the USA or Canada.
>
> William Millar's book "The Baha'i Faith": Its History and
> Teachings Published by the William Carey Library 533 Hermosa Street
> South Pasadena, Calif. 91030 is free to be read world wide on
> the internet, but is a must for the student who wishes have a
> controversial historical view of The Bahai faith, write essays,
> while attending secondary level education or write a thesis or Phd
> while at University. Free book to download
> http://www.gospelcom.net/wclbooks/thebahaifaith/Cover-Pages.htm
> http://www.gospelcom.net/wclbooks/thebahaifaith/TableofContents.htm
What were you saying about tosh?
Best wishes!
- Pat
Susan Maneck
>Which makes it a syncretistic BF.
>
Dear Dermod,
Only if you would consider Christianity syncretistic because Jesus took from
the Pharisees what was worth keeping.
And just because not everything a Manifestation says is original, doesn't mean
that nothing is.
warmest, Susan
Susan Maneck
>God, or, maybe the Pope
>thought it might adversely effect his pension plan if he gave the question
>much thought.
More likely the Pope didn't know anything about Baha'u'llah. Just because he
was supposedly sent a letter doesn't mean he read it.
Rod
> >
> >Another Manifestation who copied his ideas from somebody else?
> >
>
> Manifestations don't have to be original, Dermod. They can select whatever
They
> want.
I thought it was reveal whatever was 'given' not "select whatever They
want" ?
Satanic Verses?.