Atheist looking for religious debate. Any religion. Let's see if I can be convinced.

[Trailblazer]

You are correct. Using a logical fallacy does not automatically make something wrong. But it does make a claim of "knowing" wrong.

My "knowing" has nothing to do with logic and I never said it did.

Show me a logical fallacy that makes my knowing illogical.

 

[Trailblazer]

Correct. You only believe that Mr. B was a messenger of god. And that means that you can only have a belief in that god. You cannot know it. The basis of your belief is not based upon knowledge. Knowledge tends to build open existing knowledge. It cannot be based upon a belief.

You cannot tell me what I know because you are not me. I do know it. What I know is built upon existing knowledge, not upon belief.

 

[Trailblazer]

And perhaps that means that one could claim that one has a reasonable belief. Unfortunately his works are sound more like babble than wisdom to me. They have been poorly translated into English. On purpose. That is not a good sign.

That is just YOUR personal opinion and it has no bearing upon whether Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be. Not everyone likes KJ English.

 

[Trailblazer]

The problem is that it really is not. Poor translations simply make the claims look false. Excessively poetic lines make it too open to translation. That it is not written in clear English can be taken as evidence against it.

I never said that the Writings of Baha'u'llah are sufficient evidence to show who He was. I listed the other evidence in this post: #3537 Trailblazer

 

[Subduction Zone]

My "knowing" has nothing to do with logic and I never said it did.

Show me a logical fallacy that makes my knowing illogical.

There is no excuse not to quote the entire post when it is so short. The explanation that you were asking for was in the part that you cut off:

You are correct. Using a logical fallacy does not automatically make something wrong. But it does make a claim of "knowing" wrong. Mr. B may be a Messenger of God. No one has ever even tried to refute that in this thread. But he could also be just some regular Joe Schmoe that was handy with a pen. He is not evidence of your God. You would have to prove that he is a messenger of god to do that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is just YOUR personal opinion and it has no bearing upon whether Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be. Not everyone likes KJ English.

No, it is much more than that. It is actually a logical conclusion.

Why on Earth would someone translate a work using a King James style? If the message is important then it makes no sense to write it in a vague manner that can lead to multiple interpretations. Clear concise English would be best. On the other hand if one wanted to hide the flaws of a work using a King James style is one of the better ways to do it. At least when it comes to religious beliefs.

Tell me, is this message perhaps the most important message that one will ever come across?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never said that the Writings of Baha'u'llah are sufficient evidence to show who He was. I listed the other evidence in this post: #3537 Trailblazer

And why that was not evidence was explained to you. In other words my statement stands.

 

[Dropship]

FIFY.
Argumentum ad populum.

Iesum inuenio non reum- Pontius Pilate..
(I find Jesus not guilty)

 

[Dropship]

Sorry, but land does not vote. About one third of people are Christian around the world. By that standard the map should be only one third blue. It does not match reality.

Jesus said - "I've beaten the world" (John 16:33)

 

[Dropship]

@Dropship will Christianity become wrong when the number of Muslims exceed the number of Christians?

Islam has been playing catchup to Christianity for 1400 years and has still got a ways to go..

 

[Trailblazer]

You don't have to say that you are claiming something. The way that you write things make them a claim. If you want to claim that you it was a claim you need a qualifier in your post. Without a qualifier it does become a claim.

Why is that? Why would it be a claim unless I said "I claim?"

 

[Dropship]

Somebody accused Christians of "blind faith" but that doesn't apply to moi or to many other Christians; rather we look at all the facts and choose to put our money on Jesus because he's the safest bet around, right Kid?

"Right"

 

[Trailblazer]

Islam has been playing catchup to Christianity for 1400 years and has still got a ways to go..

Islam does not have too far to go:

"As of 2010, Christianity was by far the world's largest religion, with an estimated 2.2 billion adherents, nearly a third (31 percent) of all 6.9 billion people on Earth," the Pew report says. "Islam was second, with 1.6 billion adherents, or 23 percent of the global population."

Those numbers are predicted to shift in the coming decades, as the world's population rises to 9.3 billion by the middle of this century. In that time, Pew projects, Islam will grow by 73 percent while Christianity will grow by 35 percent — resulting in 2.8 billion Muslims and 2.9 billion Christians worldwide."

World's Muslim Population Will Surpass Christians This Century, Pew Says

 

[Trailblazer]

An understanding based upon just a dictionary definition is going to be very shallow and as a result is likely to be wrong.

And logically speaking, defining knowledge according to a video made by an anti-religious man is going to be biased. That is shallow and likely to be wrong since it is biased.

 

[Dropship]

World's Muslim Population Will Surpass Christians This Century, Pew Says

No way hozay..
That's like saying Barry Manilow fans will eventually outnumber Elvis fans, right Elv?

"Uh-huh"

 

[Trailblazer]

And though you may not like it you were the one that kept claiming that Mr. B was a messenger of God. You did not include the needed qualifiers. That is where you took on a burden of proof but never supplied it. People kept pointing out the problems with your claims.

I always said that I believe or I know, I never claimed to know it.
Thus I have no burden of proof even though I have supplied the proof.

I do not care what people pointed out, people are fallible.

 

[Trailblazer]

No way hozay!
That's like saying Barry Manilow fans will eventually outnumber Elvis fans..

Statistics are statistics. The growth rate of Islam exceeds the growth rate of Christianity and one reason is because many Christians in the United States, Canada and Europe are dropping out and becoming atheists.

The growth rates of the Abrahamic religions from 1910-2010 were as follows: Judaism .11%, Christianity 1.32%, Islam 1.97%, and Baha’i Faith 3.54%.

From 2000-2010 Islam became the fastest growing religion (1.86 %) and the Baha’i Faith was the second fastest growing religion (1.72%). Christianity is trailing behind at 1.31%.

Statistics from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_religion

The growth rates of the Baha’i Faith were higher than Islam from 1910 to 2010 because it includes the “formative age” of the Baha’i Faith (1921-1944) FOURTH PERIOD: THE INCEPTION OF THE FORMATIVE AGE OF THE BAHÁ’Í FAITH 1921–1944

Growth of the Baha’i Faith has slowed down since 2000 because the new goal is consolidation and community building, so the emphasis is not spreading the Faith all over the world as it was before in the 20th century.

 

[Trailblazer]

There is no excuse not to quote the entire post when it is so short. The explanation that you were asking for was in the part that you cut off:

You are correct. Using a logical fallacy does not automatically make something wrong. But it does make a claim of "knowing" wrong. Mr. B may be a Messenger of God. No one has ever even tried to refute that in this thread. But he could also be just some regular Joe Schmoe that was handy with a pen. He is not evidence of your God. You would have to prove that he is a messenger of god to do that.

I do not CLAIM to know, I say I know.
I cannot prove that He was a Messenger of God to anyone except myself and it is not my job to do so.

 

[Dropship]

..From 2000-2010 Islam became the fastest growing religion (1.86 %) and the Baha’i Faith was the second fastest growing religion (1.72%). Christianity is trailing behind at 1.31%.
Statistics from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_religion

The fact remains, Christianity has been leading the pack for 1400 years, and what might or might not happen in the future is just speculation and guesswork..

 

[Trailblazer]

No, it is much more than that. It is actually a logical conclusion.

Why on Earth would someone translate a work using a King James style? If the message is important then it makes no sense to write it in a vague manner that can lead to multiple interpretations. Clear concise English would be best.

That is not "the logical conclusion" it is only your conclusion. There is a logical explanation for everything that the Baha'is have done. Tony explained it in this post.

Tony said: The reason is that Shoghi Effendi went to England to study English so He could better translate the Writings of Baha'u'llah from Persian and Arabic into English.

From his studies he determined that King James English was the best form to portray Persian and Arabic to English speakers.

Apparently Persian and Arabic have a form of poetic prose that is hard to portray to English speakers. King James English must in a small way convey some of that poetic prose experienced by Persian and Arabic speakers.

Shoghi Effendi offered that the future may see different translations.

RegardsTony

#155 Tony Bristow-Stagg

On the other hand if one wanted to hide the flaws of a work using a King James style is one of the better ways to do it. At least when it comes to religious beliefs.

That is a ludicrous allegation, but we all have our personal opinions.

Tell me, is this message perhaps the most important message that one will ever come across?

Yes, in my opinion it is the most important message one will ever come across, no maybes about it.