Are Baha’u’llah’s prophecies coming true?

[KWED]

I certainly do understand what logical fallacies are and what rational arguments are.
I learned what all the logical fallacies are by posting to atheists for the last eight years, since they commit so many of them.

For example, special pleading is what atheists do 24/7, and then they accuse me of special pleading.
Pot and kettle.

special pleading
argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavorable to their point of view.
https://www.google.com/search?q=special+pleading

Aaand, there you go - demonstrating that you don't know how to apply special pleading.
Its like you are doing it on purpose, just to keep me interested.
However, as I mentioned to you before, I worry about you and so I will refrain from provoking you further. Perhaps try another hobby?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So you concede that I was correct when I said that Bahai's believe that animals do not have a soul as humans do and cannot know god.
Then what did you mean by "This is the type of reply that ...is imputing your intent on to another."?

Sorry I thought I had deleted that post, instead it must have posted. Ignore it, it needed that part removed, as I read your post incorrectly.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

My usual problems with this... Adam, Noah, Abraham and even Moses were far from perfect. There is no reason to believe they were "manifestations" of God, and even in Judaism they aren't consider to be manifestations. Same with Christianity.

With Jesus, I doubt that out of the "billions" that believed in Jesus not too many had the correct beliefs about him... according to what Baha'is believe about Jesus, that he is not God and didn't resurrect.

All good CG, RF is curing me from any desire to debate faith.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

It seems that this is just another contradictory position.
You consider him as a father when it suits, but absolve him of any responsibility when he behaves like a monster to his children.

I never considered God as a father.

God created us and the conditions we have to live under. He didn't have to, but he chose to, using his free will. Therefore he is responsible for his choices.

God is only responsible for creating us and the kind of world we live in, but God is not responsible for what we chose to do after that.

So you agree that he is responsible for the position we find ourselves in.
(This is where you flip flop again and take up another contradictory position, because you haven't thought all this through)

I certainly have thought this through, I have been thinking it through for years!
Remember, I am the one who has suffered for most of my life. By your own admission you didn't.

Isaiah 45:6-7
New International Version

6 so that from the rising of the sun
to the place of its setting
people may know there is none besides me.
I am the Lord, and there is no other.
7 I form the light and create darkness,
I bring prosperity and create disaster;
I, the Lord, do all these things.

Logically speaking, if God is responsible for everything that is not a free will choice made by a human, then God is responsible for both the good and the bad things that happen.

“Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man. But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.”
Some Answered Questions, p. 248

Man is compelled to endure them because God set it up that way since we live in a material world where some of the bad things happen are beyond our control. That is our fate, for which God is responsible.

 

[CG Didymus]

All good CG, RF is curing me from any desire to debate faith.

Regards Tony

Did you really think it would be easy? How you doing on non-debating threads?

 

[Trailblazer]

Whatever he does. He is god.
Why do you imagine god to be this incompetent, real failure? It's almost as though you have less faith in him than I do.

God does get it right, not just the first time, but every time.

I thought we couldn't understand the mind of god.
Now you are telling me you know the mind of god.
It's just one conflicting position after another.

I never said I knew the MIND of God, I only ever said I know what Baha'u'llah revealed, which is the WILL of God.

Why not?

Because there is no ONE message that applies for all time since humans and the world we live in changes over time. The Messenger of God is the All-Knowing Physician and He alone knows the remedy the world needs in every age. The age we live in is unlike any age we have ever lived in so it requires a special remedy.

“The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.

We can well perceive how the whole human race is encompassed with great, with incalculable afflictions. We see it languishing on its bed of sickness, sore-tried and disillusioned. They that are intoxicated by self-conceit have interposed themselves between it and the Divine and infallible Physician. Witness how they have entangled all men, themselves included, in the mesh of their devices. They can neither discover the cause of the disease, nor have they any knowledge of the remedy. They have conceived the straight to be crooked, and have imagined their friend an enemy.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213

Not if the message is perfect and universal.

Every message of God is perfect but God's messages are revealed according to the needs of man.
The message that humanity needed 6000, 4000, or 2000 years ago is NOT what humanity needs in this age.

And none of them have seemed to work.
And of course, you realise that is means that Bahaullah doesn't have the solution to mankind's problems either, despite this claims.

All of the Messengers of God have fulfilled their purposes and all the messages have served the purposes they were revealed for.

Baha'u'llah revealed the solution for all the problems mankind is facing in this age.

No. I am just smarter than the fairly unsophisticated thinkers who claim to be messengers of god.

Wow! How many Tablets have you written!?

Your "concept" is logically incoherent in the context of an infallible, omniscient god who has a goal he wants to achieve. It also implies that god will never achieve his goal, he is merely continuously putting band aids on a festering wound.

God has no goals but God has a Purpose for humanity and we have been advancing towards fulfilling that purpose. Rome was not built overnight.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it......

What we witness at the present time, during “this gravest crisis in the history of civilization,” recalling such times in which “religions have perished and are born,” is the adolescent stage in the slow and painful evolution of humanity, preparatory to the attainment of the stage of manhood, the stage of maturity, the promise of which is embedded in the teachings, and enshrined in the prophecies, of Bahá’u’lláh. The tumult of this age of transition is characteristic of the impetuosity and irrational instincts of youth, its follies, its prodigality, its pride, its self-assurance, its rebelliousness, and contempt of discipline.” The Promised Day is Come, pp. 116-117

God’s Purpose

And you have just shown you didn't understand my argument. Yet again. My plan involves multiple messengers, all with identical messages. I thought that was entirely obvious, given that I explained it in very simple terms.

I don't care what your plan is as you are not a Messenger of God. You are just a human who thinks he knows more than a Messenger of God.

There is and never was any need for multiple messengers, all with identical messages and that is why God never sent any.

 

[Trailblazer]

Aaand, there you go - demonstrating that you don't know how to apply special pleading.
Its like you are doing it on purpose, just to keep me interested.
However, as I mentioned to you before, I worry about you and so I will refrain from provoking you further. Perhaps try another hobby?

What? You do not like being called out for your logical fallacies? If you don't like that I suggest you limit your postings to the other Baha'is because I know all my logical fallacies and I know if and when every one applies.

Special pleading is an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception.[1][2][3][4][5] It is the application of a double standard.[6][7]
Special pleading - Wikipedia

God is a special exception and that is justified because God is not a man!
The Messenger of God is also a the special exception and that is justified because the Messenger of God is both divine and human.

 

[KWED]

I know all my logical fallacies and I know if and when every one applies.

Special pleading is an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception.[1][2][3][4][5] It is the application of a double standard.[6][7]
Special pleading - Wikipedia

God is a special exception and that is justified because God is not a man!
The Messenger of God is also a the special exception and that is justified because the Messenger of God is both divine and human.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Do you think that he should respect a given belief just because someone has that belief? Also curious.

Yes of course, as i respect his and your views of different religions you disagree with.

You seem to be unaware that when you express opinions on a public forum like this, you are participating in the marketplace of ideas, where you will encounter a subculture that you seem to be unaware of, or you misinterpret. This community has an agenda, methods, and values different from your own. You want a place where people express opinions that are never challenged. Obviously, your agenda, methods, and values are that we should all just put our ideas out there, and nobody should challenge them however incoherent. Isn't that your objection here and now? A couple of theists are being asked to defend incoherent positions, their contradictions and inconsistencies being highlighted. You object. That's unfortunate for you, because it will never be any other way, nor should it be. From Wiki:

"The marketplace of ideas holds that the truth will emerge from the competition of ideas in free, transparent public discourse and concludes that ideas and ideologies will be culled according to their superiority or inferiority and widespread acceptance among the population."

This and this alone is the basis for the idea that government will not persecute the free dissemination of ideas like these among the philosophical or contemplative class, suppressing only speech that is dangerous to public safety as opposed to the interests of established institutions, as many Americans are attempting to do with "Don't say gay," book banning, and attempts to suppress the teaching of racial atrocities in American history. Those are all ideas that belong in the marketplace to be discussed.

Are those people really different from you? You also want to suppress speech that makes you uncomfortable, although you ask people to conform to your standards rather than try to enforce them as with the examples above. Have you looked at it in those terms?

Where you find no value in dispute - just unpleasantness - others value coherent arguments and discussions about ideas. You have been asking for these people to come over to your ways and embrace your values, methods, and agenda, but you should recognize that they have no reason to do that and never will. If I had reason to stop making my arguments - perhaps because it was causing others to become suicidal - I wouldn't convert to your style. I'd just leave the forum, because I find no value for myself in doing what you do. There are times and places where I would adopt your demeanor, such as at a family gathering, for example, where it would be pointless and possibly inflammatory to adopt the academic demeanor - perhaps at a family meal or a funeral. But this is not one of those places.

It comes a moment in the discussion its better to stop before someone get offended.

Disagree. If ideas that are carefully considered, sincerely believed, and constructively offered offend some, then they either need to rethink that, avoid open forums, or they just need to be offended. Again, I ask to consider what you are asking for, what motivates your request, and why you think that people should adapt to your preferences over their own.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The claim is he fulfilled all the prophecies. So, since he came and went without establishing a peaceful, united world, that is living under God's laws, then what prophesies in any religion support that? That support the end times promised one will be rejected and imprisoned then die and the world will go through several world wars, plagues and disasters for having rejected him?

“And We will most certainly try you with somewhat of fear and hunger and loss of property and lives and fruits; and give good news to the patient.”
(Surah Baqarah 2:155)

…and he said: “O Jabir, it has a general meaning and a special meaning.
The special meaning is that hunger will afflict Kufa and especially the
opponents of Muhammad’s progeny and will destroy them. As for the general
meaning, there will be terror and hunger in Shaam that has never been faced
before. Hunger will be before the rising of the Qaim (a.s.) but terror will be
there after his rising.” This report is also mentioned in Tafsir Ayyashi through
another chain of narrators.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You keep vaccinating between conflicting positions.
You now claim that the Bible doesn't accurately represent what Jesus said, but it is still true. You claim that many Christians believe false claims about god's message, but it is still true.
You claim that for centuries, Christians were misinterpreting the Bible, but they weren't wrong.
It's all over the place.
(This is where you say "But that's not what I meant!", and provide some more conflicting or contradictory claims).

I think my explanation was clear, but if it is not clear to you, there is nothing more I can do.

It is implied by what you have said. I get the feeling that sometimes you don't fully understand the implications of your statements. They appear to be mere reactive contradictions to points and criticisms rather than thought-through, considered arguments.

It takes time for you to understand the Baha'i view.

Whuh?
You asked me for the reference where Bahaullah claimed that all humans used to have a common language a few thousand years ago, but god introduced different languages as a punishment. (I was repeating a claim made by a Baha'i on here. I thought that as you have fully, soundly, independently and logically researched Bahaullah's claims, you would have come across such an glaringly false one)

I am no even aware of what you are talking about. I think you are confusing a topic with another topic, and one person to another person.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Again, all four gospel writers had the story of the crucifixion and the resurrection. Why would they have suddenly started writing a fictional, symbolic story of an empty tomb and Jesus appearing to the disciples? The writers made it clear when Jesus was telling one of his parables, but why would they all write their own?

To me, it makes much more sense that legends and traditions of his resurrection began to spread. The gospel writers put these into their stories as if true. However, if false, if Jesus didn't rise from the dead, then the gospels should be treated as being nothing but religious myth. Sure, great spiritual, symbolic meanings in it, but not true. But that's not how they were presented nor how they were accepted. Because the NT says that he was touched and proved himself to be alive, then I believe they were meant to be taken as the literal truth of eyewitnesses to the events in the life of Jesus. Which, if it wasn't the literal truth, then it was a lie. And that's not good for Christians or Baha'is. Here once more is Abdul Baha's interpretation of the resurrection...

Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ’s resurrection is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. No, rather it was lost, for the believers were few in number and were troubled and agitated. The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.​

The Authors did not want most people know the story is not literal. Remember, this is how the Book was sealed. It means the symbolism is so difficult to be understood by most people.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Irrelevant. If god had sent messengers all with the same message, from the very beginning, there would have been no need for context because the context comes from the differences in the message.
This would also serve to reduce wars and oppression because every contact with new people would find others were just like them.

No, that is not how it works.
The teachings of God is like a medicine to cure disease. By disease I mean, the problems in society and the wrong ways of life. As in each Age and place, people had different problems, their medicine, or teachings must have been different to suit their needs.
What you say, is like, if a doctor prescribes same medication, for two completely different illnesses. How would that work?

Many religions do not follow the golden rule. They are inherently supremacist and dehumanise out-groups. They do unto others what they wouldn't like themselves because the others are different and don't deserve equal treatment. It is at the very core of the Abrahamic religions.
The Quran perfectly illustrates this when it says that disbelievers are "the worst of beasts".
Also the eternal torture of disbelievers, while the faithful laugh at them. Where is the golden rule there?

True. We are not saying the adherents of Religions have been following their Religion correctly and completely. We are talking about teachings in religions. They all have this common teaching as an example. Whether or not, the adherents have been truly following it, is another matter.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I would say that in debate that everyone gets to defend their side or views. Regarding Baha'i, I think we came to an impasse on what constitutes reliable history.

Maybe you came to that conclusion for yourself.

 

[ppp]

Maybe you came to that conclusion for yourself.

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you think that you are able to come to conclusions for someone other than yourself?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Yes, if you believe God is in control of everything, planned everything, and created everything. But, in a way, everything looks pretty random. Like I can see why a person in Ukraine right now would yell out to God and ask, "Why God? Why?" After his family gets blown up. Why was he born in that city? Why that apartment building? Why was the rocket launched at that time in that direction? Why did Putin send his troops in? Why did he become the leader in Russia? All to fulfill God's plan? And, liked asked so many times, "God couldn't have come up with a better plan than this?"

No, God couldn't come up with a better plan.
It is like saying why we die. Couldn't God creat us in a way we live forever here on earth?
No, because our soul will live a spiritual life after death. We are told It will be better, than earth.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you think that you are able to come to conclusions for someone other than yourself?

The truth does not change regardless if the conclusion we make is correct or false.

 

[ppp]

No, God couldn't come up with a better plan.
It is like saying why we die. Couldn't God creat us in a way we live forever here on earth?
No, because our soul will live a spiritual life after death. We are told It will be better, than earth.

I can think of several better plans.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Or people invent their own Gods and religion to suit their culture and needs. Again, the example of the Aztecs. They believed one of their God needed human blood. And, guess what, every time they sacrificed a human to their God, their crops grew and their empire prospered.

We do not have all details of older religions.
It is very possible people added or invented things that were not part of the religion of God. Anyways in Bahai view, the ordinances of Bible, Quran or older religions are not suitable for this Age.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I can think of several better plans.

Sure You can.