Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
No, instead, you assume without investigating.I do not need to be.
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, instead, you assume without investigating.I do not need to be.
Of course not! You already knew the answer to that. That's why you asked the question.Can you show that this is what he was talking about, that Mr B was specifically referring to the nuclear processes that can change one element into another?
I have investigated and decided differently.Yes, I have done that, and to me, he comes out as a self-bloated narcissist selling snake-oil.
Incorrect. I know enough of him to know his limitations.No, instead, you assume without investigating.
Fact is not what is known to one or every one. The definition is correct. Fact is for what verifiable evidence exists.It is a fact to me because it is known to me but it cannot be considered a fact since it is not known to everyone.
fact
something that is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information:
fact
Yes, but you appear to be rather gullible when it comes to believing something that you want to believe.I have investigated and decided differently.
So now you are admitting that you were wrong earlier.He said 'manifestations' but in the Baha'i Faith a Messenger of God is the same as a Manifestation of God.
"Abdul Baha and Shoghi could be wrong, not completely reliable, they were not manifestations!"
#1632 Aupmanyav, Today at 7:50 PM
Arrogance is your calling card.Incorrect. I know enough of him to know his limitations.
Because reason tells me that there can NEVER be any verifiable evidence for God, and it logically follows that there can NEVER be any verifiable evidence for Messengers of God. Reason also tells me it is unreasonable to expect what I can never have and don't even need.How can you reason yourself into a position if you freely admit there is no verifiable evidence for it?
Rational people know there can never be testable evidence for Messengers of God so they seek other kinds of evidence.And that's why believing in God is not rational.
I have my reason, Messengers. Jesus would have been enough, but of course he is not the only Messenger or the latest one.No, it doesn't prove that God exists, but it doesn't provide any reason to think he DOES exist either.
No, I did not just decide without checking it out. I am a very thorough person. I verified the evidence and I could verify even more evidence if I had time, but I have seen enough to know that the Baha'i Faith is true.No you haven't. You've just decided that you are correct. You could have missed something and without any external way to check, you'd never know.
The wheat accept the evidence that God provides, which is the rational thing to do. The chaff think that God is a short order cook who is going to cook up some special evidence just for them because they don't like what God has provided for everyone else.The wheat accept the evidence that magic provides and believe in it, the chaff want some other special evidence just for them so they don't believe in the magical ability for me to turn into an eagle.
How do you know? How do you know in what spirit Aup investigated? (Hard to remember his entire name) You don't. Arrogance again. @Trailblazer said to me that you are arrogant, and I believe she's right. You always have to look like you won in your own eyes.Yes, but you appear to be rather gullible when it comes to believing something that you want to believe.
No, I only mirror the people that I an arguing with when it comes to that. I am less arrogant than you are since I am willing to argue rationally.Arrogance is your calling card.
Wrong about what?So now you are admitting that you were wrong earlier.
A very very poor example to rely on.How do you know? How do you know in what spirit Aup investigated? (Hard to remember his entire name) You don't. Arrogance again. @Trailblazer said to me that you are arrogant, and I believe she's right. You always have to look like you won in your own eyes.
It is so frustrating when you do not pay attention to your own failed arguments..Wrong about what?
You just made yourself look more arrogant and you probably don't even understand why.I am less arrogant than you are since I am willing to argue rationally.
Sorry, but you are blind to your own incredible arrogance. I am well aware of mine.You just made yourself look more arrogant and you probably don't even understand why.
More arrogance. I am sure you cannot even understand why but it is not my job to point it out.It is so frustrating when you do not pay attention to your own failed arguments..
Are you looking to get reported?Sorry, but you are blind to your own incredible arrogance. I am well aware of mine.
LOL. Massive fail. Meanwhile you contradicted your post 1636, and did not realize it, even after it was pointed out. That is arrogance.More arrogance. I am sure you cannot even understand why but it is not my job to point it out.
Then stop the false claims of arrogance on my part.Are you looking to get reported?
This forum is becoming toxic.