Baha'i and Messengers

[ppp]

Omnipotent means all-powerful, it does not mean all-withstand-able. In fact, it is because God is so all-powerful that God is NOT withstand-able.

The Eternal Essence is God. Please note the purpled sentence.

“Were the Eternal Essence to manifest all that is latent within Him, were He to shine in the plentitude of His glory, none would be found to question His power or repudiate His truth. Nay, all created things would be so dazzled and thunderstruck by the evidences of His light as to be reduced to utter nothingness.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 71-72

I don't know what to tell you. If there is a thing you cannot do, then you aren't all powerful. End of story.

And it really doesn't matter because 'omnipotence' is already self-refuting. Therefore nothing is omnipotent, and this conversation is an idle exercise. Which is why modern theologians say that their favorite god is maximally potent. Capable of doing everything that is not logically contradictory. And, no. God coming into my presence without making me explode is not a logical contradiction.

I am going to make a cocktail, and then start dinner.

 

[CG Didymus]

Luckily we have science and reason to make a sound logical choice.

The greatest miracle is a change of heart.

Regards Tony

Okay, if the resurrection is scientifically impossible, then why isn't the gospel story about Jesus coming back to life just a plain old made up lie and not symbolic? And, of course, Baha'is believe that Jesus' mother was a virgin. And that is reasonable and scientific?

Yet, Baha'is believe that God created everything out of nothing. And then like several Atheists have been asking... where the scientific proof that there is a God? So no, Baha'is don't need scientific proof for everything they believe. But the resurrection... that is one thing that Baha'is don't want any part of.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

where the scientific proof that there is a God?

Where is the scientific proof there is no God?

Science has just really started CG, it needs a unity of mind before it can really start answering some bigger questions.

It is more logical to conclude that intelligent begets intelligent.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't know what to tell you. If there is a thing you cannot do, then you aren't all powerful. End of story.

But that does not mean that the thing that you do will not have consequences, which was the point of that part of the passage that was purpled.

“Were the Eternal Essence to manifest all that is latent within Him, were He to shine in the plentitude of His glory, none would be found to question His power or repudiate His truth. Nay, all created things would be so dazzled and thunderstruck by the evidences of His light as to be reduced to utter nothingness.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 71-72

I am going to make a cocktail, and then start dinner.

Good for you... I don't drink and I don't eat dinner till much later.

 

[ppp]

It is more logical to conclude that intelligent begets intelligent.

If it were logical, then you could form a series of sound logical syllogisms demonstrating your case. If not, then it is not logical.

 

[ppp]

But that does not mean that the thing that you do will not have consequences

It actually does. Because you can stop the consequences. Because...and listen carefully here...you are all powerful.

I like pangolins.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yet, Baha'is believe that God created everything out of nothing.

Abdulbaha offered that a God without a creation is not possible.

A few quotes at this link.

Creation - of the World | Bahá’í Quotes

"...For instance, they believe that this world of existence was created six or seven thousand years ago, as if God did not reign before that time and had no creation before that period. They think that Divinity is accidental, for to them Divinity is dependent upon existing things, whereas, in reality, as long as there has been a God, there has been a creation. As long as there has been light, there have been recipients of that light, for light cannot become manifest unless those things which perceive and appreciate it exist. The world of Divinity presupposes creation, presupposes recipients of bounty, presupposes the existence of worlds. No Divinity can be conceived as separate from creation, for otherwise it would be like imagining an empire without a people. A king must needs have a kingdom, must needs have an army and subjects. Is it possible to be a king and have no country, no army, no subjects? This is an absurdity. If we say that there was a time when there was no country, no army and no subjects, how then could there have been a king and ruler? For these things are essential to a king...."

‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 461

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

If it were logical, then you could form a series of sound logical syllogisms demonstrating your case. If not, then it is not logical.

That has been done.

Creation - of the World | Bahá’í Quotes

Regards Tony

 

[ppp]

That has been done.

Creation - of the World | Bahá’í Quotes

Regards Tony

if you do not understand the reasoning well enough to present, and defend it, then you are not qualified to have an opinion about it.

 

[CG Didymus]

The flesh amounts to nothing is the greatest spiritual truth available.

To acknowledge that verse acknowledges we are in reality Spiritual beings, more then a combination of atoms that becomes flesh and then decomposes to again disperse the atoms into the creative process.

It gives meaning to the resurrection of Jesus.

Regards Tony

The problem is that Baha'is take the Bible stories and stories in other religions about resurrections and make them "symbolic". The main one being Jesus. Why can't they just be myths? Except in the case of Jesus, I think if it didn't happen, then it is a lie and a hoax. Baha'is can't have that, though. So, how do Baha'is get out of saying Jesus did or didn't rise from the dead? They make it symbolic. And then Baha'is give "symbolic" meaning to the resurrection. Like Abdul Baha's...

Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ’s resurrection is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. No, rather it was lost, for the believers were few in number and were troubled and agitated. The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.
​

Now make sense of the gospel story using that. The disciples didn't get steadfast and assured after three days. Jesus supposedly said to touch him and see that he has flesh and bone and is not a ghost. In Acts it says he showed himself to be alive by many proofs. So, I don't believe the "symbolic" explanation works. What works best is that it is true or that it was made up. Neither of which works for Baha'is.

 

[Vinayaka]

Okay, if the resurrection is scientifically impossible, then why isn't the gospel story about Jesus coming back to life just a plain old made up lie and not symbolic? And, of course, Baha'is believe that Jesus' mother was a virgin. And that is reasonable and scientific?

Yet, Baha'is believe that God created everything out of nothing. And then like several Atheists have been asking... where the scientific proof that there is a God? So no, Baha'is don't need scientific proof for everything they believe. But the resurrection... that is one thing that Baha'is don't want any part of.

Don't forget that there are planets around every sun, and life on each of those planets, and that you can turn copper into gold. I simple can't imagine all the other false science that must exist in much of the never published stuff. But to each his own. Believe what you will.

 

[CG Didymus]

The naked truth and with no doubt, that would be the Bab and Baha'u'llah, as they are the purpose of all past Prophets and Messengers.

Regards Tony

So, to make it clear, none of the other religions today has the correct teachings and guidance from God and about God?

 

[CG Didymus]

Don't forget that there are planets around every sun, and life on each of those planets, and that you can turn copper into gold. I simple can't imagine all the other false science that must exist in much of the never published stuff. But to each his own. Believe what you will.

I'm glad you stopped by. I read a little on "Shaivism". Is that a reasonably good source? Here's a quote from it...

Gorakhnath Shaivism was founded by Gorakshanatha (Gorakhnath) who lived about 10th century AD. He was said to be a disciple of Matsyendranatha who was from in Nepal. The followers of this sect believe that knowledge of their tradition was given by Matsyendranath directly from Shiva himself.​

If it is just myth and legend, I'm okay with it. If some people truly believe it, I'm okay with that too. But what is important to me is that it has a person who received his knowledge directly from the God, Shiva. If that is so, then wouldn't that make him a "manifestation"?

But we know it doesn't, because he's not on the Baha'i "official" list of true manifestations. Anyway, I'm slowly learning and growing spiritually in spite of myself.

 

[Trailblazer]

It actually does. Because you can stop the consequences. Because...and listen carefully here...you are all powerful.

You do not KNOW what God can do based upon one attribute of God -- omnipotence.
Believe whatever you want to believe and I will believe what I believe.

 

[CG Didymus]

Where is the scientific proof there is no God?

Science has just really started CG, it needs a unity of mind before it can really start answering some bigger questions.

It is more logical to conclude that intelligent begets intelligent.

Regards Tony

Yes, science has a lot to learn. Maybe someday they can find proof that God exists. But... What if they find out that God can resurrect those that have died? Of course, they won't. Why would God be able to do that?

But about God... He's invisible and unknowable. Many, many people and cultures have invented Gods and Goddesses. Most all of them we don't believe are real. They were just myths the people made up to explain why they are here and why things are the way they are. But the Abrahamic God, that one, we know for sure exists and is real. Yet, we don't believe the Bible stories about that God are literally true?

That's why I'm questioning all this stuff about God along with the Atheists. If there is no objective, tangible proof, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob could very well be a made-up God also.
See you tomorrow, Tony. I'm glad you're sticking around. Since Baha'is believe they have the truth for today, I'm surprised more Baha'is aren't here on the forum.

 

[Vinayaka]

I'm glad you stopped by. I read a little on "Shaivism". Is that a reasonably good source? Here's a quote from it...

Gorakhnath Shaivism was founded by Gorakshanatha (Gorakhnath) who lived about 10th century AD. He was said to be a disciple of Matsyendranatha who was from in Nepal. The followers of this sect believe that knowledge of their tradition was given by Matsyendranath directly from Shiva himself.​

If it is just myth and legend, I'm okay with it. If some people truly believe it, I'm okay with that too. But what is important to me is that it has a person who received his knowledge directly from the God, Shiva. If that is so, then wouldn't that make him a "manifestation"?

But we know it doesn't, because he's not on the Baha'i "official" list of true manifestations. Anyway, I'm slowly learning and growing spiritually in spite of myself.

All inner insight, by anyone, can be considered 'from Shiva himself', as Shiva is inside everyone, residing in the sahaswara chakra, and the lotus of the heart. But also this is used as a metaphor, or exaggeration, for the wisdom of certain saints. This would be called the Matsyendranatah sampraday, and is close to mine, philosophically, I think. I'd have to do more research on that bit.

Many saints would be describes as embodiments of Gods as a method of saying how wise they are.

But your point is taken. There are literally thousands of saints and sages in the dharmac (and other faiths) that would have the wisdom equivalent or more of any of the selected Baha'i manifestations. Many live in caves to this day, and speak little, and would never brag about themselves ... self-realised souls.

 

[F1fan]

Where is the scientific proof there is no God?

So you admit there is no evidence that proves there is a God. Why else would you try to deflect with a logical fallacy?

Science has just really started CG, it needs a unity of mind before it can really start answering some bigger questions.

Well don't get too excited that science is going to back up any religious beliefs.

It is more logical to conclude that intelligent begets intelligent.

Let's wait for humans to get more intelligent before this argument is made.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well don't get too excited that science is going to back up any religious beliefs.

Science is never going to prove that God exists, that's just silly.
The Baha'i belief is that God is unknowable, so how could there ever be proof of God?

 

[F1fan]

Science is never going to prove that God exists, that's just silly.

Are you suggesting it doesn't exist?

The Baha'i belief is that God is unknowable, so how could there ever be proof of God?

And why should we even accept what believers claim about any God? It's unknowable, and if a believer claims to know something, it is a lie.

 

[lukethethird]

Science is never going to prove that God exists, that's just silly.
The Baha'i belief is that God is unknowable, so how could there ever be proof of God?

So you believe anyways, do you get a badge?