Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No, the Baha'i Faith is not for short term or immediate gratification, with little regard for ramifications or consequence. It is for the long term good of the whole world.
Cool. That's not what I said. You did a little bait and switch there.
You said: Ah yes. Number six: adherents will say whatever achieves short term or immediate gratification, with little regard for ramifications or consequence.
Sure. Why did you change what adherents do, to what Baha'i is for? Ii would only say that Baha'i is "for" it if the religion explicitly or implicitly admonishes believera to act in that way. I don't see any indication of that.
You think in a way that relates only slightly to a matter? Well, yes. This is obvious to all.
Sorry, I have lost track of what this discussion is about.
It is not obvious to all, not unless you know what everyone on this forum thinks.
In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so." Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia
Relentless use of irrational claims using known logical fallacies is for the long-term. You had it wrong. It is not for the short-term. Other than that, your claim is true.
I hope you remember this next time you are tempted to make one of your many "Everybody can see..." - type statements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
.
Fallacy of unwarranted assumption.
What I meant by short-term is that they go for the quick fix of the moment. That they don't worry about consistency with their previous claims. Nor do they consider that the thing they're claiming at the moment utterly demolishes their larger beliefs. They are only concerned with the quick and dirty patch, rather than some sort of long-term consideration through thoughtful nuanced analysis.
There are quite a few Baha'is on this forum that agree with me. My peers have reviewed my posts and are in agreement. However they already came to a belief in the Baha'i Faith all by themselves, they did not need to rely upon other people to review their work.
I do not deny that I said that. Peer review would introduce more biases if used for determining religious reliefs, or even it is used for its intended purpose, to assess the validity, quality and often the originality of articles for publication (see below).
No, it will not serve to highlight that truth about God because there is no reason why our peers would know any more than we know about God.
Did I say it means something special when it's Bahai's? No, I did not say that.
What proven track record does it have for removing personal biases? In fact it is the opposite. It has the potential to introduce personal biases s pointed out above, so it was just as I had logically concluded even before I read those articles.
Show me where it says that peer review can be used for determining what is objectively true. No, that is not what it is used for (see above).
For advice, but not to determine if a religious belief is true. Those religious leaders believe their religion is true so they are biased.
There is nothing wrong with doing that. We should look at scientific articles.
No, that is NOT what I did nor what I recommend doing. You I did not do "research" once I had decided based on my fallible opinion what is the correct religious belief, I did the research BEFORE I decided what is the correct religious belief.
After you have done your research and come to YOUR OWN conclusions you will receive your reward if you choose the belief that is true.
No, the scientific method does not include peer review.
I did not you should ignore anything of worth related to that religion. I said we should not make a final decision as to what to believe according to other people’s opinions.
I do not assume that at all. I have no idea if you have come to a conclusion or what conclusion you came to or unless you tell me.
I have been studying the Baha’i Faith for over 51 years. Do you think it would be very arrogant of you to decide that you were better qualified to judge the validity of the religion as an accurate representation of reality than me?
These opinions should not be excluded. Reading what learned Baha’is have written is part of our independent investigation of truth. And along those lines, if you want to know how Baha’u’llah has fulfilled the Bible prophecies for the return of Christ you should read Thief in the Night by William Sears which was written by a learned Baha’i. He researched what Baha’u’llah did to fulfil those prophecies for seven years and he even went to the holy land to verify the places that he was writing about.
It is vague because it was not intended to be an explanation as to what happens to people who get it wrong. There is nothing specifically written about nonbelievers as all Baha’u’llah wrote was what a true believer can expect as a reward and it is still quite vague because as Baha’u’llah wrote it is indescribable and the knowledge of the afterlife is with God alone.
My belief about what God wants is not my personal opinion. My belief about what God wants is based upon what Baha’u’llah wrote, since I believe that Baha’u’llah spoke for God.
That comment was unwarranted, especially given all the hours I have spent answering your posts. I just provided accurate information about the Baha’i Faith and I am in no NO WAY responsible for what you have concluded.
I am not responsible for convincing you that the Baha’i Faith is true, it is your responsibility to convince yourself if you want to know. I can lead a horse to water but I cannot make it drink.
We have already covered this. There are facts about the Baha’i Faith that can be verified but no religious belief can ever be proven to be true as a fact, since it is not verifiable that God ever spoke to anyone!
I hope you mean if there is no evidence, there is no reason we should believe it to be true. If so, I agree with that.
Sorry, that was my mistake. I did not catch that error. I should have said: "An average person could have done some things that Baha’u’llah did, but I also think that there are things that Baha’u’llah did that an average person could NOT have done."
I said it is the kind of faith that Jesus said can move mountains. Faith can be tested and if we fail the test we lose our faith. I have gone to hell and back to attain to this kind of faith. Faith does not come easy, it is always tested.
You can choose to believe it or not but only I know if I have certainty.
Maybe that is what you want to assume but it is illogical became it is the fallacy of jumping to conclusions. If I was unable to flip-flop from one thought to another I could never write all these long detailed posts and know exactly where to find all the appropriate passages in two seconds flat.
Special pleading fallacy.
I guess that is why my fellow Baha'is always give me Likes and Winners for my posts and some even start Conversations with me just to tell me how well I am doing in teaching the Faith.