Bahá'í

[PRmerger]

Servant has proposed that he has a list of criteria that allows us to very easily discern who is a true prophet.

PR If I may ask you to read and ponder the following verses, they address the matter of recognition. I have limited the number of quotes to what is relevant. Thank you for your dialogue.

"The fourth Tajalli (Effulgence) is concerning Divinity, Godhead and the
like. Were a man of insight to direct his gaze towards the blessed,
the manifest Lote-Tree and its fruits, he would be so enriched
thereby as to be independent of aught else and to acknowledge
his belief in that which the Speaker on Sinai hath uttered from
the throne of Revelation.

O ’ Ali-Akbar ! Acquaint the people with the holy verses of thy
Lord and make known unto them His straight Path, His mighty
Announcement.

Say: O people, if ye judge fairly and equitably, ye will testify
to the truth of whatsoever hath streamed forth from the Most
Exalted Pen. If ye be of the people of the Bayan, the Persian
Bayan will guide you aright and will prove a sufficient testimony
unto you; and if ye be of the people of the Qur’an, ponder ye
upon the Revelation on Sinai and the Voice from the Bush which
came unto the Son of Tmran [Moses].

Gracious God! It was intended that at the time of the manifes-
tation of the One true God the faculty of recognizing Him would
have been developed and matured and would have reached its
culmination. However, it is now clearly demonstrated that in the
disbelievers this faculty hath remained undeveloped and hath,
indeed, degenerated.

O 'All! That which they accepted from the Bush they now
refuse to accept from Him Who is the Tree of the world of
existence. Say, O people of the Bayan, speak not according to
the dictates of passion and selfish desire. Most of the peoples of
the earth attest the truth of the blessed Word which hath come
forth from the Bush."

from the fourth Tajalli, Tablets of Baha’u’llah

Beautiful!

 

[daler]

If you could show me where Jesus said that this is a criterion for discerning a true prophet from a false one, that would be helpful.

Please note: it must say that Jesus has prescribed this as a way of discerning a true prophet from a false one.

PR Perhaps I am viewing this differently than yourself, but as Jesus explains these things to His disciples, spiritual discernment is required to recognize the truth and meaning of His Message, and I would infer that the same discernment is required to recognize God’s Messenger. Particularly in verse 17, the answer to your question rests. Would this not appear reasonable to you?

Matthew Chp 13
9 Everyone who has ears, listen!’
10 The disciples came to Jesus and asked him, Why do you tell the people these stories?' 11 Jesus answered them, You can learn the secret things about the kingdom of heaven. But they cannot learn them.
12 Anyone who already has something will get more, and he will have plenty. But he who does not have anything, even the little that he has will be taken away from him.
13 That is why I tell them stories. They look, but they do not see. They listen, but they do not hear or understand.
14 They make what Isaiah the prophet said long ago, come true. Isaiah said: "You will listen and listen, but you will not understand. You will look and look, but you will not see. 15 The hearts of these people have no feeling. They do not hear well with their ears. And they have shut their eyes. They do not want to see with their eyes. They do not want to hear with their ears. They do not want to understand in their hearts. They do not want to turn to me. If they did turn, I would heal them." 16 God is blessing your eyes because they see. God is blessing your ears because they hear.
17 I tell you the truth. Many prophets and good men wanted to see what you see, but they did not see them. They wanted to hear what you hear, but they did not hear them.
18 `So listen to hear what the story means, about the man who sowed the seed.’

 

[daler]

Who was he sacrificing his life in exchange for?

Please do not refer me to a cite that explains the execution. I would just like a short synopsis in your own words.

Could you also explain this (in your own words)? How was he tortured so the sins of humanity could be atoned for?

PR In my own words, I believe that all of the Prophets of God have suffered for the sake of humanity, as a parent sacrifices so much to see his/her child have a better, richer, fuller life than they otherwise would, though that seems a watered down comparison.
I know that the reference, the way it is commonly stated, which you are making of the atonement is the particular language of how people view the sacrifice of Christ, as the Lamb of God, to enable humanity to rise above its sinful nature. In the comparison of the parent, if my adolescent child commits a crime, and I pay the bail to get them out of jail, even thought they do not deserve it, for punishment is their due, still, I want to “cover” for my children because I love them.
God desires salvation for all of His creatures, and it might be compared to someone who has a well in the middle of the desert, who desires that every traveller should find his way to the water of life. So he sends out messengers to guide the wayfarers, but the wayfarers harm or kill the messengers. Perhaps the well owner is Abraham, and He does not want to see the orphans suffer. Or perhaps it is Moses, Who only wants people to obey God’s commandments which flow out of the well of heaven. In another age, Jesus come to rescue the emaciated souls and give them to drink from the fountain, that they shall never be thirsty again.
When the Bab appeared, He, too, offered the water of life to humanity, laying down His life, as Jesus did before Him. He was tortured, scourged, for our failure to accept Him, as we failed to accept Jesus, Moses, Abraham, etc… All of God’s Messengers deliver what they are bidden by Him to deliver, and none of them claim the Message (spiritual water) to have originated with Themselves. In each age, we do not greet Them but with drawn swords and angry words of denial.
Do we accept that our sins have been atoned for? If so, then why do we still resist and deny every Messenger of God when they come?
“Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word which proceedeth out of the Mouth of the Lord.”

This did not stop with Abraham, for the Mouth of the Lord spoke more through Moses than Abraham. Again, Jesus utter more words which, in reality, proceeded out of the Mouth of the Lord God. And, as the verse says “every” word which proceedeth, it is insufficient that we should say, “OK… All I need from the Lord I heard from Abraham.” Or, as the Jews said, in so many words, “We do not need any more that what Moses spake.”
Again, “IF”, and the question of the Age we live in is in answering that question, IF the Bab was the Mouthpiece of the Lord, followed by Baha’u’llah, the Glory of God, then what proceeds out of Their Mouths in reality proceeds out of the Mouth of the Lord God, and we need that to live.

“O concourse of bishops! Ye are the stars of the heaven of My knowledge. My mercy desireth not that ye should fall upon the earth. My justice, however, declareth: ‘This is that which the Son hath decreed.’ And whatsoever hath proceeded out of His blameless, His truth-speaking, trustworthy mouth, can never be altered. The bells, verily, peal out My Name, and lament over Me, but My spirit rejoiceth with evident gladness. The body of the Loved One yearneth for the cross, and His head is eager for the spear, in the path of the All-Merciful. The ascendancy of the oppressor can in no wise deter Him from His purpose. We have summoned all created things to attain the presence of thy Lord, the King of all names. Blessed is the man that hath set his face towards God, the Lord of the Day of Reckoning.”

 

[daler]

If you could show me where Jesus said that this is a criterion for discerning a true prophet from a false one, that would be helpful.

Please note: it must say that Jesus has prescribed this as a way of discerning a true prophet from a false one.

 

[daler]

If you could show me where Jesus said that this is a criterion for discerning a true prophet from a false one, that would be helpful.

Please note: it must say that Jesus has prescribed this as a way of discerning a true prophet from a false one.

Pharisees and Sadducees Seek a Sign

“The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would show them a sign from heaven. He answered and said to them, When it is evening, you say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O you hypocrites, you can discern the face of the sky; but can you not discern the signs of the times?”

To me, it takes those spiritual “eyes to see” the signs of the times, the subject here being that the Lord has come, the awaited Messiah, to whom only those men of discernment, with eyes to see, recognized the Face of their Lord.

Today we live in the fulfillment of that prophecy when "Knowledge shall increase… and chariots jostle in the streets… and the remnants of Israel have returned after nearly three thousand years in fulfillment of the direct promises of God. Yet how many dismiss the import to this day, immersed in material pursuits, behaiving as “in the days of Noah”. It is evident that not all men have eyes to see, for they are busy playing slot machines in Vegas, or absorbed watching sports continually, or infinite other diversions.
sad, very sad indeed, when all eyes should be fixed upon the coming of the Lord in His Great Glory

 

[daler]

If you could show me where Jesus said that this is a criterion for discerning a true prophet from a false one, that would be helpful.

Please note: it must say that Jesus has prescribed this as a way of discerning a true prophet from a false one.

PR There is also the story of Saul becoming Paul who, on the road to Damascus “Saw the Light” and gained “eyes to see” the Lord, finally recognizing Him.

As in Amazing Grace, “I once was blind, but now I see…”

In contrast, those who had “physical” eyes, remained blind “spiritually”, as in
“Beholdest thou not the Son of Man seated on the right hand of power and glory?”

So yes, Jesus, in this instance “appears” in His Lordship only to those with spiritual capacity to see beyond the veils of human limitations.

 

[PRmerger]

PR There is also the story of Saul becoming Paul who, on the road to Damascus “Saw the Light” and gained “eyes to see” the Lord, finally recognizing Him.

As in Amazing Grace, “I once was blind, but now I see…”

In contrast, those who had “physical” eyes, remained blind “spiritually”, as in
“Beholdest thou not the Son of Man seated on the right hand of power and glory?”

So yes, Jesus, in this instance “appears” in His Lordship only to those with spiritual capacity to see beyond the veils of human limitations.

Amen!

You are absolutely correct that there are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

However, it is quite another thing to say that a prophet can be discerned from a false leader by having the right “glasses”.

It appears to be an inutile criterion.

Again, it is like sending your husband out to buy the “right” avocados, which are the ones with purple meat. Although they all look green on the outside–the wrong ones as well as the right ones.

Another criterion is required in order to be helpful.

 

[PRmerger]

In the comparison of the parent, if my adolescent child commits a crime, and I pay the bail to get them out of jail, even thought they do not deserve it, for punishment is their due, still, I want to “cover” for my children because I love them.

Indeed. True and absolutely correct.

God desires salvation for all of His creatures, and it might be compared to someone who has a well in the middle of the desert, who desires that every traveller should find his way to the water of life. So he sends out messengers to guide the wayfarers, but the wayfarers harm or kill the messengers. Perhaps the well owner is Abraham, and He does not want to see the orphans suffer. Or perhaps it is Moses, Who only wants people to obey God’s commandments which flow out of the well of heaven. In another age, Jesus come to rescue the emaciated souls and give them to drink from the fountain, that they shall never be thirsty again

Wonderful analogy!

When the Bab appeared, He, too, offered the water of life to humanity, laying down His life, as Jesus did before Him. He was tortured, scourged, for our failure to accept Him, as we failed to accept Jesus, Moses, Abraham, etc… All of God’s Messengers deliver what they are bidden by Him to deliver, and none of them claim the Message (spiritual water) to have originated with Themselves. In each age, we do not greet Them but with drawn swords and angry words of denial.

How was his death a sacrifice? In exchange for whom?

Again, please use your own words. Thanks.

 

[daler]

the “right” avocados… Another criterion is required…

PR I believe that the “right” criterion varies from person to person, and culture to culture, and that there are no one set of criteria that serve as a convincing proof to every soul.
Were I asked to specify what my own criteria were, it would be something like this:

My spiritual journey began in a small farming town on an Indian Reservation, where the effects of racism and poverty were quite pronounced, the hypocrisy apparent in the status quo of religiosity, the Viet Nam war, a sea of materialism, etc. Also, the balance between science and religion needed a new fulcrum, or paradigm, to be resolved in the court of reason. Literal interpretation of myths, when one is grounded in science, is impossible. My “proofs” required an allowance for rational understanding of spiritual realities.

So… Did Jesus fly off into outer space (heaven)? Not likely!
Did He pull loaves and fishes out of thin air? No, Santa did that when he brought the toys.
Did Jesus walk on water, above 32 degrees? Had trouble with that one, too.
And were dead, I mean “really” dead (like 3 months buried dead) brought to life?

So the stories I was told since my childhood fit well into the other various tales commonly taught to little children to help them go to sleep at night and look forward to something in the morning. There is an Easter Bunny, a Tooth Fairy, a big guy in a red suit who visits every house in the world with his flying reindeer in a single night. Then we’ve got Superman (my favorite), Batman, the Incredible Hulk and the “magic” of Moses parting the Red Sea, Noah stuffing two of every critter on earth in a boat, and Jesus … the mythological Jesus, to be sorted out from the rational, yet still miraculous (in other ways) Jesus who walked, ate, slept (or got really, really tired), went potty, breathed (or turned blue), and bled when He was poked.

In a culture which still tries to make me believe that something in the store is selling for less than a dollar, at 99.9 cents, magic and myth-making, yarn-spinning, and story-telling have not gone away. Humans, being humans (that is), do tell stories, stretch the truth, and talk about magic. Why there’s a fellow down at the coffee shop who swears he can talk to people all over the planet, watch TV, and pull up just about everything ever written down just by talking to this thing in his hand!! Wait a minute! He “can” do all that…

But at least I can follow the logic of the cell phone, have a grasp on the workings of computer chips, electricity, plastics, chemical formulas, and I’m beginning to get a notion of what quantum physics insists about how a photon can be in two places at once… Ahhhh… I sure hope Santa brings me an iPhone for Christmas, even if he has to come through the electric heater in my bedroom.

Getting back to my Lord, in Whom I do fully believe, I see Him as both human, subject to the same laws of physics and biology that I am, and an expression of the Godhead, i.e. a “Manifestation of God”.
But can I prove that He is by weighty and convincing utterances? to someone who sees the world differently than myself? like one of my Indian friends? when what he needs as criteria is for the Prophet to turn into a White Buffalo Calf and walk away? like the one who brought the sacred Pipe over four hundred years ago?

Nope. I admit that I cannot do that. My “rational” answers that work for me don’t necessarily work for my Lakota friend. My fascination with time and place prophecies more accurate than a Timex watch and a GPS unit rolled into one don’t mean a thing to most folks, including the 7th Day Adventists who are still certain that 1844 AD was the absolute, certain sure, unmistakeable year of the Lord’s Return as prophesied by Daniel himself. (As well as Moses in Leviticus, John in Revelation, etc, etc, etc)

Until that kitten opens up its eyes, the sun can shine on it all day long and it can’t see a glimmer of light, and there’s nothing in the whole universe of criteria that’s gonna make it see until its momma picks it up by the scruff of the neck and carries that kitty to Damascus… and even then, it’s momma can’t see for it, despite all the criteria coming out of its belly, filled with life-giving milk!

 

[PRmerger]

the “right” avocados… Another criterion is required…

Hiya, daler. Would you mind learning how to use the quote feature correctly?

The way you are posting now makes my words appear as yours, and me no like that.

Not to mention it’s a little bit o’ false advertising.

There are numerous threads that teach you how to to respond in the correct format.

Thanks for your attention to this.

 

[PRmerger]

PR I believe that the “right” criterion varies from person to person, and culture to culture, and that there are no one set of criteria that serve as a convincing proof to every soul.

This does not make sense. My criteria may discern that Jesus is Lord, but another’s criteria may be used to discern that Jesus is Satan.

They cannot both be right.

How can this be true then that the “right” criteria varies from person to person?

Also, Catholicism does not use the paradigm of having “convincing proof”. Convincing? Yes. Proof? No. Unless you mean “proofs” as in Aquinas’ arguments. But even then we do not use it as you seem to be applying the term here.

 

[PRmerger]

My spiritual journey began in a small farming town on an Indian Reservation, where the effects of racism and poverty were quite pronounced, the hypocrisy apparent in the status quo of religiosity, the Viet Nam war, a sea of materialism, etc. Also, the balance between science and religion needed a new fulcrum, or paradigm, to be resolved in the court of reason. Literal interpretation of myths, when one is grounded in science, is impossible. My “proofs” required an allowance for rational understanding of spiritual realities.

So… Did Jesus fly off into outer space (heaven)? Not likely!
Did He pull loaves and fishes out of thin air? No, Santa did that when he brought the toys.
Did Jesus walk on water, above 32 degrees? Had trouble with that one, too.
And were dead, I mean “really” dead (like 3 months buried dead) brought to life?

So the stories I was told since my childhood fit well into the other various tales commonly taught to little children to help them go to sleep at night and look forward to something in the morning. There is an Easter Bunny, a Tooth Fairy, a big guy in a red suit who visits every house in the world with his flying reindeer in a single night. Then we’ve got Superman (my favorite), Batman, the Incredible Hulk and the “magic” of Moses parting the Red Sea, Noah stuffing two of every critter on earth in a boat, and Jesus … the mythological Jesus, to be sorted out from the rational, yet still miraculous (in other ways) Jesus who walked, ate, slept (or got really, really tired), went potty, breathed (or turned blue), and bled when He was poked.

Thank you for sharing your story here. It is enlightening to see where you have come from, and where you hope to be.

In a culture which still tries to make me believe that something in the store is selling for less than a dollar, at 99.9 cents, magic and myth-making, yarn-spinning, and story-telling have not gone away. Humans, being humans (that is), do tell stories, stretch the truth, and talk about magic. Why there’s a fellow down at the coffee shop who swears he can talk to people all over the planet, watch TV, and pull up just about everything ever written down just by talking to this thing in his hand!! Wait a minute! He “can” do all that…

It seems to me that you are saying that since there are myths such as Santa, dragons, elves, leprechauns, that the stories in the Bible are also myths.

If that is what you are saying, then why don’t truths such as 2+2 = 4 make you believe that there are truths in the Bible?

Getting back to my Lord, in Whom I do fully believe, I see Him as both human, subject to the same laws of physics and biology that I am, and an expression of the Godhead, i.e. a “Manifestation of God”.

Jesus did indeed make himself subject to the laws of physics and biology. But he also superceded these laws.

But can I prove that He is by weighty and convincing utterances? to someone who sees the world differently than myself?

Well, truths are true, no matter if someone views the world differently than you do.

For example, do you think that someone who grew up in Pakistan will think that 2 + 2 = 5?

And that this is ok?

My “rational” answers that work for me don’t necessarily work for my Lakota friend.

Would you proclaim that your Lakota friend is free to say that he can build a bridge that doesn’t follow the laws of science, since he views the world differently?

Would you let your child drive his car over this bridge when an engineer says, “I don’t follow the laws by which I received my degree. I see the world differently, and constructed this bridge using my own laws.”

 

[daler]

How was his death a sacrifice? In exchange for whom?

Again, please use your own words. Thanks.

PR It has been said (by Bruce Lee, as I recall) that a full belly does not know hunger exists.
It has been said that men have walked on the moon, to which I can testify that I saw it on TV, along with my family and poor grandma (born in 1890), who was just shakin’ her head…
It has been said that Custer’s last words were, “Where did all those Indians come from!?!?”

We can chat quite comfortably in our Lazy Boy recliners to folks all over the planet while eating cold, refrigerated watermelon picked by “illegal” aliens from across the border, spitting sunflower seeds harvested by a machine 4 states away, and fiddle with a lap-top computer that has a thousand times what the Space Shuttle navigated by, or millions of times what Apollo got to the moon and back from.

If 750 rifles were pointed your breast, or mine, or both (as was the case for the Bab and His companion) at high noon on a hot day in July with ten thousand people watching, I really wonder whether the question would even come up:

“How was his death a sacrifice?”

After turning the whole of Persia (Elam, in ancient times) on its head, disrupting the entire established hierarchy of Islam (which held millions of people in the grasp of its bloody hands), fearlessly and repeatedly promising the immanent coming of Him Whom God shall make manifest, i.e., the Promised One of All Religions, specifically foretold in the Holy Books and traditions of Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Native American, etc…

the question: “In exchange for whom?”

… takes on a whole new meaning.

Back on the farm, we had a saying.

“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.”

Well, when the rich folks started irrigating their crops and our windmill produced only a trickle of water, we had to go to town and haul barrels in the back of a pick-up truck, splashing all the way. And if the horse wasn’t thirsty, it still wouldn’t drink!

At that point, we could point to the well, and all just walk away…

 

[PRmerger]

“How was his death a sacrifice?”

After turning the whole of Persia (Elam, in ancient times) on its head, disrupting the entire established hierarchy of Islam (which held millions of people in the grasp of its bloody hands), fearlessly and repeatedly promising the immanent coming of Him Whom God shall make manifest, i.e., the Promised One of All Religions, specifically foretold in the Holy Books and traditions of Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Native American, etc…

It sounds like what you are describing is a tragedy. His execution was a tragic, horrific event.

But as for a sacrifice? I’m still not seeing it.

Please forgive my blindness. But could you please explain how it could be a sacrifice? And in exchange for whom?

 

[daler]

Hiya, daler. Would you mind learning how to use the quote feature correctly?

The way you are posting now makes my words appear as yours, and me no like that.

Not to mention it’s a little bit o’ false advertising.

There are numerous threads that teach you how to to respond in the correct format.

Thanks for your attention to this.

PR… I am not very computer savvy. Please forgive me for being inept. I will take a look, but kindly tolerate the unintentional mistakes being made. I learned how to type in High School, a long time ago, add and subtract with a #2 pencil. These dang computer things are handy, but frustrating. Need to move to Missouri, the “show me” state!

PS No “false advertising” intended

 

[PRmerger]

PR… I am not very computer savvy. Please forgive me for being inept. I will take a look, but kindly tolerate the unintentional mistakes being made. I learned how to type in High School, a long time ago, add and subtract with a #2 pencil. These dang computer things are handy, but frustrating. Need to move to Missouri, the “show me” state!

PS No “false advertising” intended

No need to be so apologetic, daler.

Just check out these threads to give you an assist:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=573270
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=6675

 

[daler]

It sounds like what you are describing is a tragedy. His execution was a tragic, horrific event.

But as for a sacrifice? I’m still not seeing it.

Please forgive my blindness. But could you please explain how it could be a sacrifice? And in exchange for whom?

(PR as to the quote thing, please help me if this turns out wrong again. I just hit the Quote tab and it sends me to this box. On my end, most of the time it looks like normal. If it appears incorrect on your end, kindly let me know again. So sorry.)

As to “Sacrifice”, I am trying to backtrack here and think in the context of the Jewish traditions of sacrifice, for I believe that lays the foundation of Jesus as the Lamb of God, sacrificed in a universal sense, replacing the need for sacrificial rites so long practiced by the Jews. This long history, as I understand it Biblically, points to the atonement of sins, no longer put upon the scape-goat, but symbolically raised to a much higher meaning when Jesus died upon the cross. This is specific to Christianity among the world’s religions, insofar as I understand it, and has become a “primary focus” of attention which, in the eyes of many, wraps up the whole enchilada (no offense intended here) of the “theological package”, and has a similar “stopping effect” as the term “Seal” of the Prophets has in Islam, which is their primary focus whenever the subject of the “Return” comes up.
In other words, as important as the Sacrifice of Jesus is, and the effect of wholly focussing on that terminology and point in the unfoldment of the purpose of religion itself, there is a “whole” forest that is not being seen for the trees, in a very important sense. The Jews had the “literalist” blinders on the horse of their theology which prevented them from seeing that the Lord of the Sabbath was standing right smack dab in front of them.

No matter how deficient I may be at answering your most valid question, it still does not invalidate the more important question of “Who” was the Bab, not the whys and wherefores of how is He a sacrifice for mankind in the same, or similar, way as was Jesus, as the Lamb of God. The “Lamb” of God is also foretold in Revelation in reference to the second coming, as I understand it, which would further imply the same station of sacrifice.

The Baha’is see the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies in Jesus for the first coming of the Messiah, as well as the fulfillment of Jewish and Christian prophecies in the coming of both the Bab and Baha’u’llah in numerous (not incidental) prophetic verses. This being the case, both the Bab and Baha’u’llah are also “Sacrifices” for humanity in the eternal plan of God. In a thousand, or thousands of years, another “Manifestation” of God will appear, followed by another, etc, as long as people walk the earth.
There will undoubtedly be Jews still awaiting the Lord of Hosts, Christians awaiting the Return of Christ, and Muslims awaiting the Qa’im and Mihdi, for thousands and thousands of years to come, each group thinking that the last time God sent a Prophet or Messiah was way back when…

I hope, my friend, that in my simple way and understanding, the logic of your important question of “Sacrifice” has been answered. Its the best I can do, you see.
Also, in my approach, which has still got one boot on the farm, I am not in any way offending you by the straightforward means of communication to which I am accustomed.

God bless you, brother

 

[PRmerger]

(PR as to the quote thing, please help me if this turns out wrong again. I just hit the Quote tab and it sends me to this box. On my end, most of the time it looks like normal. If it appears incorrect on your end, kindly let me know again. So sorry.)

Much better. Now my words are attributed to me. Your words are attributed to you.

As to “Sacrifice”, I am trying to backtrack here and think in the context of the Jewish traditions of sacrifice, for I believe that lays the foundation of Jesus as the Lamb of God, sacrificed in a universal sense, replacing the need for sacrificial rites so long practiced by the Jews. This long history, as I understand it Biblically, points to the atonement of sins, no longer put upon the scape-goat, but symbolically raised to a much higher meaning when Jesus died upon the cross. This is specific to Christianity among the world’s religions, insofar as I understand it, and has become a “primary focus” of attention which, in the eyes of many, wraps up the whole enchilada (no offense intended here) of the “theological package”,

Yes.

The Jews had the “literalist” blinders on the horse of their theology which prevented them from seeing that the Lord of the Sabbath was standing right smack dab in front of them.

Indeed.

No matter how deficient I may be at answering your most valid question,

I appreciate your recognition that this is indeed a valid question, esp. in light of the comparisons that are being made to Christ.

it still does not invalidate the more important question of “Who” was the Bab, not the whys and wherefores of how is He a sacrifice for mankind in the same, or similar, way as was Jesus, as the Lamb of God. The “Lamb” of God is also foretold in Revelation in reference to the second coming, as I understand it, which would further imply the same station of sacrifice.

My question is indeed valid, as you affirm, so it is important that this question be addressed fully, before moving on to the questions you deem to be more important.

Is it true or not true that the Baha’i faith says that the Bab’s death was sacrificial in nature?

 

[daler]

No need to be so apologetic, daler.

Just check out these threads to give you an assist:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=573270
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=6675

PR I clicked on these and it is helpful to me. Not sure my petrified brain will get it totally, but will give it a whirl, or a chisel… Have you got a hammer I can borrow?

Also, maybe I won’t spill glue on my keyboard anymore when I copy and paste ??

 

[PRmerger]

Also, maybe I won’t spill glue on my keyboard anymore when I copy and paste ??

BTW, I am your sister, not your brother.