False Prophets the most used comeback!

[Servant19]

Yes, a warning against men like Baha’u’llah. Not all false prophets are outwardly
depraved people, but some will come as wolves in sheep’s clothing. Many could
appear as having fruits of the Spirit, but wtill reveal false teachings.

What is the definition of a false teaching?

.

 

[Servant19]

“Ye shall know them by their fruits,… By “fruits” are meant, not so much their external works in life and conversation; for a false prophet may so behave, as not to be discovered thereby. So the Pharisees were outwardly righteous before men; and false teachers among Christians may have the form of godliness, and keep it up, though they are strangers to, and even deny the power of it: but their doctrines are here meant, and the effects of them. When doctrines are contrary to the perfections of God, repugnant to the Scriptures of truth, tend to depreciate the person and offices, blood, righteousness, and sacrifice of Christ, to lessen the glory of God’s grace, to exalt the creature, and to fill men’s minds with notions of the purity, self-sufficiency, and ability of human nature; when they are calculated to feed the pride and vanity of men, to serve their own interests”

Gills commentary on Matthew

The issue then becomes public revelation to which none other is accepted save that of Jesus Christ. What appears is perpetual public revelation similar to the Mormons. Should one believe it or not isn’t of question. The fact is (public) it doesn’t change and expose’s the issue. On a deeper level of prophecy in Catholicism the issue compounds.

Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!

Romans 16:17
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them.

And of course …biblehub.com/sermons/auth/finlayson/antichrist.htm

Anti-Christian

Gary can you tell me which of the doctrines of the Baha’i Faith are “contrary to the perfections of God, repugnant to the Scriptures of truth…” please ?

.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

If you are talking about historical events here, why would the Bible be an “absolute” source of reliable history?

Well many of the places in the Bible are real, many we can still visit.
There are historical sources outside of the Bible that verify the Bible.
Modern Archeology verifies much of the Bible. So Bible NOT Good?

ALL scholars are divided on even which letters were actually written by Paul and which were possibly not. Either way, there are a LOT of things which many Christian New Testament scholars are divided on their authenticity, from each of the 24 books.

First, 46, remember you’re talking to a Catholic, not Protestant or a Post–Christian
Jew. The scholars can fiddle with authenticity all they’d like, but the fact of the mat-
ter is that God chose these 46 books of the Old Testament. So yet again I ask you:
Bible Not Good?

You are stuck on Ishmael and Isaac?

…move on…

There are no contradictions…

Well if I ignore all the contradictions, then you are right, there are no contradictions.
Ishmael and Isaac is only one among many various contradictions, but let’s focus
on that, since you brought it up, the Bible says that God told Abraham to sacrifice
Isaac, because only Isaac from Abraham’s perspective and of God’s is Abraham’s
only true son, while Ishmael was the son of extra-marital fornication. Muhammad
and Baha’u’llah, however, change the story. Who am I going to believe?

It’s inescapable, unless we simply disregard it. "Oh well that was written like 4,000
years, the Bible is unreliable (Mormon-Alert). Curiously though, about 2,000 years
later, the writer of Hebrews says it was Isaac, Paul said it was Isaac, and even one
of the Twelves Apostles of Jesus, Saint James, said that it was Isaac.

The Scriptures are God-Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), straight from God through the writers
of the books in the Bible, so to trust the Bible is to trust God. To diminish the credibility
of the Bible is to diminish the credibility of God, why don’t you get that? So am I going to
believe God or a 19th century man who called himself the “Glory of God?”

…:hypno:…:hypno:…
:hypnoON’T LISTEN TO THE BIBLE,:hypno:
:hypno:♪ LISTEN TO BA–HA–U–LLAH ♪:hypno:
…:hypno:…:hypno:…

uh, Yeah, no.

 

[Servant19]

Well many of the places in the Bible are real, many we can still visit.
There are historical sources outside of the Bible that verify the Bible.
Modern Archeology verifies much of the Bible. So Bible NOT Good?

No, I never said this dear Judas

If there are historical sources etc etc that are correct it does not mean that there cannot possibly be any historical inaccuracies

This is basic reasonable thinking friend…

There are other historical inaccuracies attested to by many scholars (off the top of my head I remember reading about one that relates to the historical accounts around the killing of John the Baptist)

.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

What is the definition of a false teaching?

.

False Teaching – That which is not True Teaching.

Where can we find this “True Teaching”?
The Bible is a good start.
The Church also which Christ himself established (Roman Catholic Church) is cool too.

Man born in Mecca who contradicts both of the above? No.

Man born in 19th Century who does likewise? No.

 

[Servant19]

Bible Not Good?

Bible VERY GOOD

It teaches me spiritual truths. I do not rely on it for my history class to learn about the Roman Empire…

 

[Servant19]

False Teaching – That which is not True Teaching.

Where can we find this “True Teaching”?
The Bible is a good start.
The Church also which Christ himself established (Roman Catholic Church) is cool too.

Man born in Mecca who contradicts both of the above? No.

Man born in 19th Century who does likewise? No.

Again, I ask you, how do you know the Bible provides “true teaching”?

.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

No, I never said this dear Judas

If there are historical sources etc etc that are correct it does not mean that there cannot possibly be any historical inaccuracies

This is basic reasonable thinking friend…

There are other historical inaccuracies attested to by many scholars (off the top of my head I remember reading about one that relates to the historical accounts around the killing of John the Baptist)

First, what’s this about John the Baptist?

Anyway . . .
You may not be saying the exact words “Bible Not Good,” but
that does not mean that you are not implying “Bible Not Good.”

As for historical records being possibly inaccurate, if the Bible
says one thing, and other sources are in accord with what the
Bible says, odds are it is a reliable source.

Likewise, if Genesis says Isaac, and Paul says it was Isaac, James and
the anonymous writer of Hebrews both say Isaac, that’s reliable, but then
when Muhammad and Baha’u’llah say Ishmael, their credibility is to be of
questionable validity.

 

[Servant19]

Well if I ignore all the contradictions, then you are right, there are no contradictions.
Ishmael and Isaac is only one among many various contradictions,

Can you point me in the direction of other contradictions please?

but let’s focus
on that, since you brought it up, the Bible says that God told Abraham to sacrifice
Isaac, because only Isaac from Abraham’s perspective and of God’s is Abraham’s
only true son, while Ishmael was the son of extra-marital fornication. Muhammad
and Baha’u’llah, however, change the story. Who am I going to believe?

It’s inescapable, unless we simply disregard it. "Oh well that was written like 4,000
years, the Bible is unreliable (Mormon-Alert). Curiously though, about 2,000 years
later, the writer of Hebrews says it was Isaac, Paul said it was Isaac, and even one
of the Twelves Apostles of Jesus, Saint James, said that it was Isaac.

How does this impact on your spiritual life Judas?
Are you basing your entire spiritual understanding of religious history on this discrepancy?

The Scriptures are God-Breathed (2 Timothy 3:16), straight from God through the writers
of the books in the Bible, so to trust the Bible is to trust God. To diminish the credibility
of the Bible is to diminish the credibility of God, why don’t you get that? So am I going to
believe God or a 19th century man who called himself the “Glory of God?”

Baha’u’llah was given this title by His Apostles.

God “breathed” is not quite the same as God Himself speaking directly…

(please read up on the first hand accounts of when Baha’u’llah’s Revelation was being recited by Him and what a miracle it was)

.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Gary can you tell me which of the doctrines of the Baha’i Faith are “contrary to the perfections of God, repugnant to the Scriptures of truth…” please ?

Revelation…

CCC-God has revealed himself fully by sending his own Son, in whom he has established his covenant for ever. The Son is his Father’s definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c2a1.htm

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Again, I ask you, how do you know the Bible provides “true teaching”?

Well there’s historical validity to the Bible, for one, so that makes it trustworthy.

As on the teachings themselves,
I suppose there it is a matter of Faith, but it is Faith also in something that has been consistent throughout the ages. Books
like the Qur’an, Book of Mormon, Oahspe, etc. each came from a single person, each contradicting the inspired words of the
Bible, which was written by many men over the course of hundreds upon hundreds of years, handed down by a people who
were very meticulous in how they preserved Scripture.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Bible VERY GOOD

It teaches me spiritual truths. I do not rely on it for my history class to learn about the Roman Empire…

Except Muhammad and Baha’u’llah blatantly ignore the significance behind the Isaac and Ishmael issue.

The Bible is very clear on that, and provides spiritual truths through that identifying of Isaac.

Pick Ishmael instead and spiritual truth suddenly disappears.

 

[kimg901]

Revelation…

CCC-God has revealed himself fully by sending his own Son, in whom he has established his covenant for ever. The Son is his Father’s definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him.

What is the definition of a false teaching? Any teaching that teaches a person to fall away from Christ and His Teachings (My opinion) or any teaching that contradicts or adds to Christ and His Teachings. I’m sorry Servant but if its on wiki then it must be true Men will change history for their own glory and praise. So why would God (Jesus) fail His first Church and have all these other churches after Him? So is it safe to all these other churches will fail because God is a failure?

 

[kimg901]

Except Muhammad and Baha’u’llah blatantly ignore the significance behind the Isaac and Ishmael issue.

The Bible is very clear on that, and provides spiritual truths through that identifying of Isaac.

Pick Ishmael instead and spiritual truth suddenly disappears.

Do you think it would be safe to say that these men are using Ishmael because they cant comprehend Gods power and are using Ishmael because of the way he was received on this earth through relations between a man and woman? Where as Sara was told she would conceive a child in her old age by God through relations with Abram. Curious.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Can you point me in the direction of other contradictions please?

Well in the Baha’i Faith, Jesus is a Prophet of God, Not God Himself.
The Baha’i Faith also denies the Triune Nature of God.
The Baha’i Faith denies the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Baha’i Faith also rejects Jesus as the ONLY WAY to salvation.

There are many other examples, I’m sure, but that’s all could gather for now.

How does this impact on your spiritual life Judas?
Are you basing your entire spiritual understanding of religious history on this discrepancy?

Well to not believe God is, more often than not, very Hell-worthy, “Sacrifice of Ishmael” al-
so diminishes the importance of the Children of Israel, not to mention of Jesus Christ him-
self in regards to his unique Sonship to the Father (Reminder: BOTH are GOD) and in re-
gards to HIS sacrifice, and YES of course I am basing my entire spiritual understanding
of religious history as sent by the Lord God himself.

Baha’u’llah was given this title by His Apostles.

Is that right? Fair Enough.

God “breathed” is not quite the same as God Himself speaking directly…

You don’t even understand what that phrase means?!
The phrase “God-breathed” is a translation of the etymological roots of the Greek θεόπνευστος.
Most English versions of the Bible translate this Greek word as “inspired by God”. (“Inspire” is
derived from the Latin word inspiratio, which like πνευστος, originally denoted breath or spirit.)

Also,
God breathed “the breath of life” into Adam and Jesus (who is also God) breathed on the Apostles
saying, "Receive the Holy Spirit’” (Holy Spirit is also God). How can you belittle the very Breath of
God like that? What, to you it’s just Divine Carbon Dioxide? Believe it or not, I’ve heard a Mormon
do the same thing you just did, “Oh ‘God-Breathed’ doesn’t really have anything to do with God ac-
tually ‘speaking’.”

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Do you think it would be safe to say that these men are using Ishmael because they cant comprehend Gods power and are using Ishmael because of the way he was received on this earth through relations between a man and woman? Where as Sara was told she would conceive a child in her old age by God through relations with Abram. Curious.

I don’t know about the “God’s Power” part, but they just cannot
comprehend the implications and the significance behind why it
really matters on whether it was Isaac or Ishmael.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Whats the significance of this verse…Genesis 16 “He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.”

Job- "Who let the wild donkey go free? Who untied its ropes?

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

1. he will be a wild man—literally, “a wild *** man,” expressing how the wildness of Ishmael and his descendants resembles that of the wild ***.

his hand will be against every man—descriptive of the rude, turbulent, and plundering character of the Arabs.

dwell in the presence of all his brethren—dwell, that is, pitch tents; and the meaning is that they maintain their independence in spite of all attempts to extirpate or subdue them.

 

[tonyfish58]

Revelation…

CCC-God has revealed himself fully by sending his own Son, in whom he has established his covenant for ever. The Son is his Father’s definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c2a1.htm

“So there will be no further Revelation after him (Christ)”. This is unfortunately an error in the interpretation of the Bible. Baha’ullah has explained this if you are interested. The Bible is very clear that Christ will return, it is the Resurrection interpretation that is the issue.

The Muslims have made the same mistake with the Koran and the Issue of Seal of the Prophets!

The Writings of the Bab and Baha’u’llah clear this all up

By their Fruits you shall know them is the Topic, have we even started to determine what they are?

If we are told to look for them should it not be clear what they are?

It is not as difficult as we have made it, shall we go on and get to the bottom of this Truth?

Regards Tony

 

[tonyfish58]

What is the definition of a false teaching? Any teaching that teaches a person to fall away from Christ and His Teachings (My opinion) or any teaching that contradicts or adds to Christ and His Teachings. I’m sorry Servant but if its on wiki then it must be true Men will change history for their own glory and praise. So why would God (Jesus) fail His first Church and have all these other churches after Him? So is it safe to all these other churches will fail because God is a failure?

Baha’u’llah brings us closer to Christ.

Baha’u’llah has 100% fulfilled this

John 16:14 “He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it to you”.

God and Christ never Fail, it is us, history will prove this too us. Man has changed the intent of the Bible, the warnings are there in the Bible, the deception was slow and gradual, it may have been with good intent, but it happened. Now man clings to Doctrine that prevents them seeing God with their own eyes. God, Christ and all the Prophets yearn for us to see them as One!

We have to overcome this falsity and look for God with new eyes and hear with new ears.

May God guide us all.

Regards Tony

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

“So there will be no further Revelation after him (Christ)”. This is unfortunately an error in the interpretation of the Bible. Baha’ullah has explained this if you are interested. The Bible is very clear that Christ will return, it is the Resurrection interpretation that is the issue.

The Muslims have made the same mistake with the Koran and the Issue of Seal of the Prophets!

The Writings of the Bab and Baha’u’llah clear this all up

By their Fruits you shall know them is the Topic, have we even started to determine what they are?

If we are told to look for them should it not be clear what they are?

It is not as difficult as we have made it, shall we go on and get to the bottom of this Truth?

Regards Tony

But we keep missing the end of the prophets! Hebrews 1:2, in times of old God sent prophets,
in these Last Days God speaks to us through Jesus (who is also God). That nullifies all other
so-called prophets coming after Jesus. That’s it! Muhammad, the Bab, and Baha’u’llah are the
kind of false prophets that Jesus warned us about, preaching false gospels that Paul warned
us about. And of course Baha’u’llah can explain the contradictions away, Joseph Smith did it
EA-ZY!

It was John the Baptist who was the Seal of the Prophets, no prophets later.
What about Jesus? I guess one could kinda count him as a prophet, sort of,
but officially no, he was the Messiah promised by the prophets, which really
doesn’t mean much to the Baha’i and Muslims.