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

[TransmutingSoul]

And I'm sure, to you, these break away groups of Baha'is are totally wrong, and they don't have very many followers, but they still are a sect, aren't they?

Simply, No, once cut off they are no longer part of the tree and are in the process of death, not growth.

Regards Tony

 

[InvestigateTruth]

1. You said you had objective evidences.

2. I asked you to demonstrate the best you had.

It isn't possible to be any clearer than that. Just demonstrate the best piece of objective evidence you think you have for any deity, as you claimed you could.

I already said Book of Iqan.
You said this is not objective evidence.
I asked you then give me an example what could be an objective evidence, so I can see what I can provide.
To me, the Book of Iqan is a proof. To you it may not, because I spent some years on it. So, I can see it is work of divine.
You have not read the Book yet, so I don't blame you for not seeing it as I see. But what can I do? God wants the evidence be clear once people read His Book completely and think about it fairly.
I also provided a story about how some scholars demanded miracles from Him, and He accepted to do it. Moreover, Baha'u'llah wrote to the king of His time, saying gather the scholars, and I will come and provide any proves they want. They did not do it.
Bahaullah also wrote many times, that He did not have human learnings, He did not go to school, and despite this, He said that He knows all things. He said anything that ever happend on earth He has knowledge of. He revealed thousands of Tablets and proved this in practice.
He wrote to the king, He did not study neither went to school, and asked King to investigate this to see He is honest.

Book of Iqan, is just one of His works. He wrote it in just two days. People have witnessed He just revealed things without reading or thinking what to write. He did not have Books to learn or refer to them, while writing His books. Yet, despite all these thousands of works He wrote, while in prison and exile, no one could prove to find a single error in them.

Again I ask you, if these are not objective evidences, what could possibly be?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

If you what to say that none of them have enough members to qualify as a sect, that's fine. But still, these were members of the family and top leaders that broke away. It happened in the past and could happen again.

I don't want to say they don't have enough members to be called sects. But I leave that Judgement to you.
All other religions had several sects within 150 years after their beginning.
Do you know why they did have sects after their founder passed, and why the Bahai scriptures say, this will not happen in Bahai Faith?

 

[CG Didymus]

Simply, No, once cut off they are no longer part of the tree and are in the process of death, not growth.

Regards Tony

That's why I gave the example of some Christian sects. By Baha'i standards they aren't connected to the real God. They believe in the Trinitarian God. The analogy only works if there is a God that feeds life-giving things to the religion. But lots of religions survive, because the perception is that they are connected to the truth from God.

 

[CG Didymus]

I don't want to say they don't have enough members to be called sects. But I leave that Judgement to you.
All other religions had several sects within 150 years after their beginning.
Do you know why they did have sects after their founder passed, and why the Bahai scriptures say, this will not happen in Bahai Faith?

It doesn't matter that much to me to make a big deal about it. All I was pointing out was that there are groups that are considered sects of the Baha'i Faith. And after the death of each leader there was a power struggle.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That's why I gave the example of some Christian sects. By Baha'i standards they aren't connected to the real God. They believe in the Trinitarian God. The analogy only works if there is a God that feeds life-giving things to the religion. But lots of religions survive, because the perception is that they are connected to the truth from God.

There was no written covenant by Jesus Christ that cut them from the tree. The branch's still grew, they were still connected to the same tree.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

So you are seriously claiming that a human can live for 1000 years?
And if your response is "But is was through magic", then you need to show that this magic actually exists. If your response is along he lines of "well Noah lived for 1000 years", we can dismiss your entire position as obvious nonsense.

Here's some stuff I found...

"The years of Noah are not years as we count them, and as our teachings do not state that this reference to years means His dispensation, we cannot interpret it this way." (From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer...

"Then the Master asked Esmael: "How old was Moses?"

"One hundred and twenty years," he replied. "But the patriarchs, such as Noah and others lived many hundreds of years."

"The Master said: "The age of those ancient prophets as recorded in the Old Testament is symbolic. It has a spiritual interpretation. Wert thou informed of the science of anatomy thou wouldst realize that this human mechanism and these material organs cannot last more than one hundred and twenty years."" (Attributed to 'Abdu'l-Baha.
​

Not years as "we" count them? I wonder how else years were counted? Then some Baha'is said that it was the "dispensation" of Noah. That is his well-known religion and Scriptures, I guess? But no. It was not his "dispensation". Then the good old tried and true Baha'i answer... The ages of people in the OT were symbolic. But it is in the writings of Baha'u'llah where it says that Noah was 950 years old. And nobody, not even his son knows what he was talking about?

There are little bits of information that could very well mean that some of these writings aren't from an unknowable God, but from a man claiming to be from God.

​

 

[CG Didymus]

There was no written covenant by Jesus Christ that cut them from the tree. The branch's still grew, they were still connected to the same tree.

Regards Tony

Yeah, I see it as roots to a God that they invented. Religious movements don't have to be necessarily true to grow. But, of course, the followers believe it is true.

 

[ppp]

I have no cognitive dissonance as per the definition that I posted. The term cognitive dissonance is used to describe the mental discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs, values, or attitudes. I am in no conflict over what I believe.

According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent.

That is what people are saying that you have done...are doing. Not that you have actually made the ideas consistent, but that you have created internal rationalizations so that they feel consistent to you. Like when slave owners held the belief that their slaves were inherently inferior, but owned slaves that were more skilled or more intelligent than the slave owner in one or more areas. They reconciled their cognitive dissonance by attributing the slave's skill or intelligence to animal cunning. And post psychology to buzz words like idiot savant.

In your case, you have, among other things, convinced yourself that you have a firm grasp of logical argumentation and fallacies. And that you are weilding the associated terms and concepts competently.

 

[Sheldon]

I already said Book of Iqan.
You said this is not objective evidence.
I asked you then give me an example what could be an objective evidence, so I can see what I can provide.
To me, the Book of Iqan is a proof. To you it may not, because I spent some years on it. So, I can see it is work of divine.
You have not read the Book yet, so I don't blame you for not seeing it as I see. But what can I do? God wants the evidence be clear once people read His Book completely and think about it fairly.
I also provided a story about how some scholars demanded miracles from Him, and He accepted to do it. Moreover, Baha'u'llah wrote to the king of His time, saying gather the scholars, and I will come and provide any proves they want. They did not do it.
Bahaullah also wrote many times, that He did not have human learnings, He did not go to school, and despite this, He said that He knows all things. He said anything that ever happend on earth He has knowledge of. He revealed thousands of Tablets and proved this in practice.
He wrote to the king, He did not study neither went to school, and asked King to investigate this to see He is honest.

Book of Iqan, is just one of His works. He wrote it in just two days. People have witnessed He just revealed things without reading or thinking what to write. He did not have Books to learn or refer to them, while writing His books. Yet, despite all these thousands of works He wrote, while in prison and exile, no one could prove to find a single error in them.

Again I ask you, if these are not objective evidences, what could possibly be?

Then pick what you believe to be the best piece of objective evidence for a deity from that book, and post it here.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Then pick what you believe to be the best piece of objective evidence for a deity from that book, and post it here.

I actually had made a thread about Book of Certitude (aka Iqan)

Investigating Bahaullah's Book of Iqan

I put a challenge to what the Book claimed to be. It is in the OP of that thread.

 

[Trailblazer]

According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent.

That is what people are saying that you have done...are doing.

But it is not what I have done or am doing.

Not that you have actually made the ideas consistent, but that you have created internal rationalizations so that they feel consistent to you.

Nope. How do you to think you know what is going on inside my head? Not even a counselor would talk like that, as if she knows me better than I know myself. That is arrogant.

In your case, you have, among other things, convinced yourself that you have a firm grasp of logical argumentation and fallacies. And that you are weilding the associated terms and concepts competently.

That is because I have a firm grasp of logic. Prove that I do not or stop claiming I don't.
You made the claim so you have the burden of proof. Without proof all you have is a personal opinion, a bald assertion.

 

[ppp]

I actually had made a thread about Book of Certitude (aka Iqan)

Investigating Bahaullah's Book of Iqan

I put a challenge to what the Book claimed to be. It is in the OP of that thread.

You restricted that thread to believers. The challenge was to quote from it and talk about how right it was.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

You restricted that thread to believers. The challenge was to quote from it and talk about how right it was.

Not really. It is not in the Bahai Dir. So, anyone can participate and discuss. As you can see in that thread, some challenged, and tried to refute Bahaullah"s claim about the Book. So, no, it is not comfined to believers in Bahaullah or Iqan.

 

[danieldemol]

What religion is the prophecy from? Baha'i? Then yes this prophecy is about the Bahai religion.
The prophecy itself is about the world. First it failed to happen which resulted in apologetics like crazy.

So whatever, it's still going to happen at some later point, they just mis-read scripture. Uh huh.

So a paper explaining the prophecy prediction of lesser peace by 2000 was a mis-translation goes on to make a claim -

"The House of Justice states in its letter of 19 April, 2001 to an individual accompanying the Memorandum of the Research Department of the same date, that: "...there can be no doubt that promise of `Abdu'l-Bahá has now been fulfilled, and the unity of nations securely established in the century now concluded."

No doubt huh?

Did Prophecy Fail? The Lesser Peace and the Year 2000

Just wanted to draw the peoples attention to an important statement made by Baha'i author Jack Mclean in the Baha'i link you referenced;

"Prophecy is interpreted in retrospect." (Under "about this document").

I see that as a frank admission of the part post hoc rationalisation plays in Baha'i prophecy fulfillment.

In my opinion.

 

[ppp]

But it is not what I have done or am doing.

Clearly others disagree.

Nope. How arrogant of you to think you know what is going on inside my head.

How do you know I think I know what's going on inside your head, unless you know what's going on inside my head? Gasp! You are being arrogant!

Do I do this to anyone else?

And how.

That is because I have a firm grasp of logic.

Thank you for illustrating my point so ably.

 

[ppp]

Not really. It is not in the Bahai Dir. So, anyone can participate and discuss. As you can see in that thread, some challenged, and tried to refute Bahaullah"s claim about the Book. So, no, it is not comfined to believers in Bahaullah or Iqan.

So what is one thing from the book of iquan that you think proves it came from a god?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

So what is one thing from the book of iquan that you think proves it came from a god?

Well I explained it in OP of the other thread.

I prefer to continue there, but it is OK if you want to quote me from that thread here and continue.

 

[ppp]

Well I explained it in OP of the other thread.

I prefer to continue there, but it is OK if you want to quote me from that thread here and continue.

The op wasn't clear (to me) and I did not understand what that passage was supposed to be demonstrating

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The op wasn't clear (to me) and I did not understand what that passage was supposed to be demonstrating

OK, fair enough I explain.

Bahaullah according to history did not have any education in religion. He was born in a noble family, that was not educated in any religion.
Yet, He wrote Book of Iqan in only two days.

In this Book He says:

"In fact, all the Scriptures and the mysteries thereof are condensed into this brief account. "

It means, that if you pick up any teaching from any previous Holy Books, such as Bible, Quran, Hinduism or Buddhism scriptures,... it is found in the Book of Iqan, in a condensed form.
If Bahaullah did not study previous scriptures, and still in two days wrote a Book that includes all teachings of all those Past Holy Books and Scriptures isn't it a proof of divinity?

To me yes.