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

[KWED]

The video was not for the purpose of convincing anyone that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be. It was simply informational.

You presented that video when asked why you believe he actually communicated with god rather than being delusional of dishonest.
Now you admit there is no such evidence in the video. Par for the course.

What made you think he was delusional or deceptive? Do you just assume that with no evidence?

1. I have never claimed that he was. The issue is whether you accept that he might have been.
2. We have plenty of evidence for people being delusional or dishonest. We know people hear voices that aren't there, and people tell lies for one reason or another. Therefore it is unreasonable to insist that he cannot have been delusional or dishonest but instead must have actually been in communication with a god for whom there is no evidence (note: Bahaullah telling you he had spoken to god is not evidence that he did. He might have been delusional or dishonest).

I did not say that the video shows that, as that is not the intended purpose of the video.

That was in response to your claim...
"I also know [he was not delusional or dishonest] by reading His Writings which were written over the course of many years."
So I repeat, "How does that show that Bahaullah was not delusional or dishonest?".

I realize it is a bold claim but you have to ask yourself why Baha'u'llah would lie about being a Messenger of God.

Any number of reasons, both selfish and altruistic. He could also have been delusional.

What would be His motive? He suffered for 40 years at the hands of the His enemies and was imprisoned and exiled and banished from place to place. He derived no personal benefit, only untold suffering.

1. Delusional covers all that.
2. History is full of people who have sacrificed their lives for actual people and things.

I do not know what would constitute evidence for you. What is evidence to some people is not evidence to others. We are all different.

Yet again, this has been explained to you many times. "Evidence" is something that can be independently verified. If it requires mere belief then it is not evidence.
What you claim to be "evidence" is not evidence. It is belief.

 

[KWED]

I never admitted that His own self can be delusional.
It is OUR own selves that can be delusional.

Special pleading fallacy.

 

[Sheldon]

But that is not how Bahaullah's "prophesies" work. Yes, he says something vague and inaccurate, but there is no secondary explanation of the details. After the event, his followers pore over his utterings and say "Ooh look, this might have been referring to something that has happened, confirmation bias kicks in and lo and behold, you have your "fulfilled prophecies". But like so many claims of this nature, they are only believable and convincing to those believers who are already convinced.

As a child I read one of those books that outline strange events, or makes them up or embellishes them shamelessly to make them appear as if something supernatural has occurred. One of the stories was about the supposed curse, that befell the archaeologists who open Tutankhamun's tomb. The first death was described in hushed tones as lights went out all over Egypt mysteriously, and people prayed. Even as a child I knew what a power cut was, and when I later read that the person involved had died from blood poisoning, most likely from an infected mosquito bite accidentally cut while shaving, the superstition just seemed funny.

However the best was to come nearly 70 years later, when the last well known British member of the dig died peacefully at home, and one tabloid paper ran the headline "Tutankhamun's curse strikes again" ....

 

[KWED]

If you want to know the truth you have to independently investigate and verify the evidence for yourself.

I have, and the conclusion is that Bahaullah was most likely delusional or dishonest.

Independent Investigation of Truth

A propaganda piece by a Baha'i is not "independent investigation".

How do you know God can make himself appear as anything?

Because he is god.

How do you know that the Eternal Essence of God would not be lethal?

Why would it be? He is god. He can make his essence a healing balm. You portray him like a virus or venomous snake.

I know as much as I need to know and as much as I could ever understand.

Clearly not the former, but seemingly the latter.

Apparently God wants to hide, or He would not be hiding.
What do you think you can do about it if God chooses to hide?

You claim he is hiding, I claim he is not there.
You have to explain why god would want to hide. I don't need to explain why something that doesn't exist isn't there.

 

[KWED]

I hope that guidance does come.

Consider though, you may very well be crucified, or shot, you will no doubt be persecuted and ridiculed, also tortured in many ways.

Then every thing you offer, will be rejected and scorned.

Regards Tony

But that hasn't happened, despite communicating with god and telling people about it. It seems not all his messengers have such bad luck (although you seem to be rejecting my claims - why is that? Have I not shown sufficient proof for those who believe?).

 

[KWED]

The self of Baha’u’llah is the 'Self of God',

Oh, so Bahaullah was god? Yikes!

and Baha'u'llah is in no way applicable to my statement.

How do you know that god in human form cannot be delusional as humans can be?

I suspect you know that though. If not, then one needs to read what Baha'u'llah has offered about our human self.

I had read that he was a human who was a messenger of god, but you tell me he was god, which I was not aware of.

 

[KWED]

The real irony is that this is clearly an attempt by a totalitarian autocrat, to roll eastern Europe back to an old world order that fell apart. There's nothing new about it at all, in any sense, and of course all world orders are new at some point anyway, so the histrionics that accompany wild claims for fulfilled religious prophecies, are as hilarious as they are baffling.

The almost tortured attempts to always bend dramatic events into prophecies, inevitable reminds me of The Life of Brian.

"BLOOD & THUNDER PROPHET: ...And the bezan shall be huge and black, and the eyes thereof red with the blood of living creatures, and the whore of Babylon shall ride forth on a three-headed serpent, and throughout the lands, there'll be a great rubbing of parts. Yeeah...

FALSE PROPHET: ...For the demon shall bear a nine-bladed sword. Nine-bladed! Not two or five or seven, but nine, which he will wield on all wretched sinners, sinners just like you, sir, there, and the horns shall be on the head, with which he will...

BORING PROPHET: ...Obadiah, his servants. There shall, in that time, be rumors of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things wi-- with the sort of raffia work base that has an attachment. At this time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock. Yea, it is written in the book of Cyril that, in that time, shall the third one..."

Boring Prophet was always my favourite. I have posted the video of him on one of a certain member's many threads as an example of what he sounds like, but I suspect it went right over his head.

 

[Sheldon]

You are mocking the idea of God but God does not like being mocked, and whether you believe God exists or not, God knows your every thought.

You realise he doesn't believe any deity exists right? How scared are you of things you don't believe are real? Are you terrified of The Lord Sauron's anger, do you spend much time worrying about it?

 

[Sheldon]

Using quotes is easy.

at the text you want to have appear as a quote, you put an open square bracket, like this [

Then you write QUOTE.

Then a close square bracket ]

You should have [quote]

Then you have whatever text you want to have as the quote.

then, to finish the quote, you do the same thing, except you put a / in front of the word quote.

So if you write:

[quote]This is quoted text.[./quote]

You will get

Or you could just use the quote function, the icon that is a square with a + symbol in it.

It's a single click.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

In the long run CG, one has to decide if they should mock God, or submit to God.

False dichotomy for skeptics, who don't need to do either. Also, the way you phrase that, any life other than submission to a believed in deity is mockery of that deity.

Mocking is not a virtue.

Look again at your definition of mockery. It is any other thought or deed other than submission to a god belief. Is this response an example of mockery of your God?

no matter how appropriate or inappropriately we offered this, people still chose not to listen.

No, they have heard you. They just don't believe you. The same can be said in reverse: no matter how sound the reasoning, you still choose to not listen. You know what the skeptic's criteria for belief are, and you don't meet it, yet you still expect to be taken more seriously than anybody else who hasn't made their case.

It seems to me that the believers have a difficult time understanding who they are posting to. Your first comment suggests that you don't understand that atheists don't believe in gods, and will reject such a comment out of hand as I did. Now, you seem to think that they should heed your counsel based on your unevidenced beliefs. And you are in the majority. Most theists appear to be unaware of what the skeptic believes (we really don't have a god belief) or how he arrives at the beliefs he holds. But the people you are writing to have no difficulty understanding that you have a god belief and how you came to it.

You are quite a hypocrite to try to use a Bible you do not even believe is true to prove your point.

His argument doesn't depend on him believing scripture, just knowing what it says. Skeptics frequently cite scripture to demonstrate its internal contradictions, the character of the deity it describes, failed and low quality prophecies, and errors in history and science.

Somebody claimed that the scriptures say that nobody has seen the face of God, and produced a couple dozen scriptures in support of that. You produced a half dozen scriptures contradicting him, then called him a hypocrite. He made his point, and you made mine about internal contradictions in those scriptures. He is not a hypocrite. A hypocrite would be somebody who says what's wrong for others to do is OK for him or her and gives either no reason for the double standard or an irrelevant one.

No, a claim and a belief absolutely are not the same thing.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
Belief: an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

I have to give this one to you. A claim is a stated belief, and not all beliefs are stated. A belief one doesn't express is not a claim.

However, you do express your beliefs, so they are also claims.

Using quotes is easy.

at the text you want to have appear as a quote, you put an open square bracket, like this [

Then you write QUOTE.

Then a close square bracket ]

You should have

Are you aware that you can do the same thing by highlighting a passage to be quoted and clicking on +quote? You can do this repeatedly and download them all at once into an reply box to answer. That's how I put all of these quotes into this post. I never typed the word quote even once to do that. Also, good list of scriptures you dug up. I copied and pasted them to my running Word doc of useful gleanings from RF. (Oops! Looks like @Sheldon posted this first)

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You realise he doesn't believe any deity exists right? How scared are you of things you don't believe are real? Are you terrified of The Lord Sauron's anger, do you spend much time worrying about it?

I suppose it is not possible to prove there is no God. So, it is wise not to mock, just in case.

 

[Sheldon]

I did want peoples' opinions as to whether the prophecies are coming true.

5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

All prophecies are open to interpretation because they are being read by humans who interpret them to mean different things.

Well a meaningless request then, given you admit that it can't be answered objectively, as it's just a matter of subjective opinion.

 

[Sheldon]

and they never will.... not even the Messengers will ever see God, they only hear His Voice.

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

1 John 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

Oh really?

Exodus 33:11
Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend.

Deuteronomy 34:10
Since that time no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face,

Genesis 32:30
So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, “I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved.”

 

[Sheldon]

Moses never saw God. The Christians know this based on scripture. You are the one who should be embarrassed.

"Exodus 33:11
Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend."

Are you saying that is not scripture? It never ceases to amaze me that biblical and Quranic texts make a very specific and unequivocal claim, and theists laughably try to deny it. yet wishy washy vague claims are subjectively "interpreted" to mean just about whatever they want, even things that bear no resemblance to the text.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

"Exodus 33:11
Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend."

Are you saying that is not scripture? It never ceases to amaze me that biblical and Quranic texts make a very specific and unequivocal claim, and theists laughably try to deny it. yet wishy washy vague claims are subjectively "interpreted" to mean just about whatever they want, even things that bear no resemblance to the text.

One needs to read and consider what Baha'u'llah has offered on this topic, before coming to any conclusion.

What Moses saw we can not know, but Baha'u'llah in this case, has said it was Baha'u'llah that conversed with Moses.

To understand what is offered above, also requires an understanding of the relationship of a Messenger to God.

It is beyond the scope of this OP, but it also shows how a Messenger knows the beginning and the end, that is why they give prophecy in a veiled language.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Okay, things are bad when he comes, but in Revelation he gets rid of the evil people and establishes God's kingdom. And he doesn't get thrown in jail and die.

Revelation 19:11 I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. 12 His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. 14 The armies of heaven were following him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. “He will rule them with an iron scepter.” He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

king of kings and lord of lords.

17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18 so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

19 Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army. 20 But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. 21 The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.
Then he reigns for 1000 years and for some reason Satan is let loose again only to be destroyed along with all people whose name is not written in the Book of Life. Nowhere, is this person rejected and thrown in jail.

Revelation is a different point of view.
Revelation is about establishment of true Religion by the Promised One, and exposing the falsehood of the false religion. Truth wins against evil and falsehood. It does not mean all people recognize it or follow it.

Well that clarifies it.

 

[CG Didymus]

Of course, this means that we can take any vague claim, then pick some event, interpret the claim in a way that describes the event, and then say that the claim is a valid prophecy.

That is obviously nonsense.

Here's a well-known "prophecy" This is from a book written by Bill Sears, who became a "Hand of the Cause" in the Baha'is Faith.

The Book of Revelation prophesied: 1. “… and, lo, there was a great earthquake.”1 This was the first sign that was to appear. 2. “… and the sun became black as sack-cloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;”2 This was to be the second sign. 3. “And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.”3 This was the third sign that was to appear. This was the final promise, and would be seen just before the coming of the Messiah in the last days....

I came across the account of one millennial scholar who made a study of the historical events leading up to the 1840 period. When he had completed his search, he made the following statement: “As we look, we find the events recorded (in Revelation), following on in the order predicted.”1 These events which he listed were as follows: 1. The Lisbon earthquake, 1755. 2. The Dark Day, 1780. 3. The Falling Stars, 1833...

Many Biblical scholars pointed to the exact fulfilment, and in the proper order of the prophecies concerning the heavens and the signs of the coming of Christ as given in the sixth chapter of Revelation: 1. The appearance of the great earthquake in 1755. 2. The sun darkened and the moon turned into blood on the Dark Day of 1780. 3. The stars falling from the heavens in 1833. In this same chapter it is foreseen that the Messiah shall come and topple the kings from their thrones, for the great day of the Lord will have come. Christ said: “… and the stars shall fall from heaven …. And then … shall they see the Son of man coming …”​

Sounds pretty good. Except the earthquake was 90 years before The Bab declared himself in 1844 and was in Portugal. The dark day and the stars falling were a smoky day and a meteor shower in North America and both were years before 1844. Why would they be "signs" of someone announcing he is God's messenger in Persia years later? Of course, Baha'is have no problem with it.

 

[CG Didymus]

This is why Jesus is called the Lamb.

Then is Jesus the "Lamb" referred to in Revelation?

 

[Sheldon]

One needs to read and consider what Baha'u'llah has offered on this topic, before coming to any conclusion.

No one does not, since the text is quite specific and unequivocal, and offered verbatim in response to a specific claim.

What Moses saw we can not know, but Baha'u'llah in this case, has said it was Baha'u'llah that conversed with Moses.

Well one random unevidenced assertion is much the same as another, so I don't see the point here sorry? Also if we cannot know this, then TB was wrong to assert Moses had not seen god face to face.

To understand what is offered above, also requires an understanding of the relationship of a Messenger to God.

I am an atheist, I don't believe in any deity, and I don't therefore obviously believe there are any messengers from any deity or deities. Again I was responding to a specific claim about Moses, and offered a biblical quote verbatim, which specifically and unequivocally contradicted that claim. The bible also offers similar texts claiming others saw god face to face. I don't believe them of course, but that has no relevance since TB claimed no one could or has seen god face to face, and claimed to believe the bible is true.

It is beyond the scope of this OP, but it also shows how a Messenger knows the beginning and the end, that is why they give prophecy in a veiled language.

Occam's razor offers a far simpler explanation, one that doesn't require I believe in unevidenced deities or any unevidenced supernatural claims.

 

[CG Didymus]

Since Baha'u'llah many kings have fallen, there has been WW I, WW II, the rise of the Bolsheviks, the fall of the Bolsheviks, the Revolutions in China, the Great Depression, to name a few.

First, when hasn't there been changes in types of rule, changes in who rules, and when hasn't there been wars and depressions and plagues? My other question is still the same... Is that what the prophecies say? That the promised one of all ages comes, gets rejected, dies and the world continues in turmoil?

Now the Baha'i prophecies might say that is exactly what happens, but do the prophecies in the other religions, the ones that supposedly have all been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, say that?

And again, am I correct in thinking that the true Baha'i prophecy has the world rejecting the Baha'i Faith almost to the point of extinction... that the people of the world only turn to the Baha'is as their very last hope for survival? That Baha'is do predict nothing but wars and disasters are coming our way. Is that inevitable, or do Baha'is believe the wars and disasters can be avoided? And, if it can, what must happen to avoid them?