Can we change our mind about what we believe?

[ppp]

True, evidence is evidence.

Objective evidence is evidence that we can examine and evaluate for ourselves.
Objective evidence - definition and meaning - Market ...

We can examine and evaluate the facts surrounding the person, life, and mission of Baha'u'llah, so we have objective evidence.
Whether or not the available body of facts or information convinces people that He was a Messenger of God is another matter.

That is so sloppy that you are either inviting deceit, or trying to smuggle the deceit in yourself. By that shoddy standard, simply writing a statement makes the claim more probable. Pfui.

 

[ppp]

Baha'u'llah did not write that his writings can self-substantiate. No one's writings self substantiate.

Which is why the Baha'i faith is not true.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is so sloppy that you are either inviting deceit, or trying to smuggle the deceit in yourself. By that shoddy standard, simply writing a statement makes the claim more probable. Pfui.

In a court of law evidence is information proffered to make the existence of a fact more or less probable (beyond a reasonable doubt).
For example, if the prosecutor is claiming that Joe Smith has in fact murdered his wife he has to present evidence to back up that claim, so he presents all the facts surrounding the crime that was allegedly committed.

Likewise, an alleged Messenger of God proffers information to back up his claim, making it more or less probable (beyond a reasonable doubt).

 

[Trailblazer]

Which is why the Baha'i faith is not true.

That does not compute because we have MORE than His writings to know whether the Baha'i Faith is true or not.

Aside from that, you are claiming that the Baha'i Faith is not true but you can never prove that the Baha'i Faith is not true, not anymore than I can prove that it is true. All you can ever do is believe it is not true, just as all I can do is I believe it is true.

 

[ppp]

In a court of law evidence is information proffered to make the existence of a fact more or less probable (beyond a reasonable doubt).
For example, if the prosecutor is claiming that Joe Smith has in fact murdered his wife he has to present evidence to back up that claim, so he presents all the facts surrounding the crime that was allegedly committed.

There is no evidence that murder or wives are things that can happen or exist. All you have is Bob writing it down, and a bunch of people who think that Bob is the best, writing and saying that Bob is right.

Based on no more than that, convict Joe.

 

[ppp]

That does not compute because we have MORE than His writings to know whether the Baha'i Faith is true or not.

Nothing relevant.

Aside from that, you are claiming that the Baha'i Faith is not true but you can never prove that the Baha'i Faith is not true, not anymore than I can prove that it is true. All you can ever do is believe it is not true, just as all I can do is I believe it is true.

You are confusing not true with false.

 

[ppp]

Moral cowardice is the face of trivial adversity is contemptible.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I believe people of the past must have viewed any heavenly body as a star. So it might be justifiable to say that it means asteroids or pieces of an exploded asteroid fell to earth or it could just be ordinary meteorites.

And science proves how wrong they were! Not just about stars but about many things. No, I don't blame them. They knew only that much. I blame people of today if they stick to what people thought 2000 or 1500 years ago, and have since been proved wrong by science, like Young Earth or Creationism.

 

[jes-us]

Can we change our mind about what we believe?

We change can mind our what about believe we

 

[ppp]

We change can mind our what about believe we

We really cannot.

 

[ppp]

And science proves how wrong they were! Not just about stars but about many things. No, I don't blame them. They knew only that much. I blame people of today if they stick to what people thought 2000 or 1500 years ago.

100%

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. it's used to mean that 'someone has made a conclusion based on a premise that lacks support'.
I do not assume if someone claims to be this messenger it's true. I believe it's true because of the evidence.

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. ..​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106​

If a man was a Messenger of God, what other kind of evidence could there be? I posted a thread asking that question years ago, and nobody could give me a logical answer.

Miracles are not evidence that a man received messages from God, but even if they are evidence of something supernatural, they are only evidence to people who witnessed the miracles when the Messenger was alive. What about everyone else?

You won't answer my questions, you will sidestep, since you cannot provide a logical answer.

Did he tell me? Even if he did tell me how would that be any different from me reading what he wrote in a book? I would have to believe what he told me. How do we know anything? Because people tell us, or we read it in books or on the internet. A dead person cannot tell us so all we have is what they wrote.

You would not know what logic is if it hit you in the face.

All of your arguments are uncogent, weak, inductive arguments. The conclusion never follows and it's complete nonsense.

No, let's not. I have no need to read your gibberish.

Carry on. All you succeed in doing is providing me with free ad space for the Baha'i Faith.

The problem is the evidence that you choose to believe. It is sufficient for you and insufficient for all people other than Bahais.

About your quote from 'Gleanings', my life also has been exemplary (though there are things that others do not know and those who know do not speak about it). Life of Bahaollah too was not any different. The only difference is that I do not uselessly rave about world peace and brotherhood or about 'eternal life' falsehood. Is that what makes him a messenger of Allah?

With Allah at his back, there could have been a hundred miracles to establish that Bahaollah was a messenger of Allah. For example, each home or the backpack of a homeless person could have got a copy of Kitab-i-Aqdas in his own language. Then everybody could have believed in what Bahaollah was saying. But your Allah does not choose to do that. Allah knows the best.

 

[jes-us]

We really cannot.

The thread starter , posted a post from her mind . I changed her mind by rearranging her own words in reply .

Yes I can change minds because I know that all books are an arrangement of words shared by the writer . God doesn't speak English , Arabic or any language of Earth because all these languages were formed by humanities evolution , formed words that construct humanities very existence .

God created our bodies but God didn't create words and languages .

Changing ones mind is simply rearranging words in ones head .

 

[ppp]

The thread starter , posted a post from her mind . I changed her mind by rearranging her own words in reply .

Yes I can change minds because I know that all books are an arrangement of words shared by the writer . God doesn't speak English , Arabic or any language of Earth because all these languages were formed by humanities evolution , formed words that construct humanities very existence .

God created our bodies but God didn't create words and languages .

Changing ones mind is simply rearranging words in ones head .

You haven't done anything but brag about things that you have not done.

 

[jes-us]

You haven't done anything but brag about things that you have not done.

Quite clearly you miss the point I made !

Belief is a set of words in a defining arrangement that constructs a sentence . Example - I believe in God

To change my mind and belief I only have to change the arrangement of the words , Example - I don't believe in God

Words are your mind, we think in words and pictures , associating the word with a picture .

I don't brag , everyone knows Jesus was a teacher .

 

[CG Didymus]

First and foremost, all we have is some dude writing that his writing can self-substantiate.

And most, if not all of us have read some of the teachings of Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith. For me, I found problems.

For Christians, Adam disobeyed God and caused sin to enter the world. Then God sent his son, Jesus, to pay the penalty for that sin by dying on the cross. But God didn't let his son's body rot away. God raised him from the dead.

For Baha'is, Adam is a manifestation of God, therefore a perfectly polished mirror that reflects God. Then they don't believe in any "original" or "inherited" sin or sin nature from Adam. So, there is no need for Jesus to sacrifice himself by dying on a cross. And then, Baha'is don't believe that Jesus rose physically from the grave... but that he died, and his body did rot away like everybody else's.

Then Baha'u'llah says that Ishmael, not Isaac, was the son taken by Abraham to be sacrificed. Which goes against both Judaism and Christianity. None of this bothers Baha'is, though. What Baha'u'llah says is what's true, and those other religions and their Scriptures are what's wrong. For sure, somethings wrong. And, because Baha'is say that all the other religions were true and came from the same God, then maybe Baha'is are just as wrong as all the others.

I do think it's a pretty good religion to believe in, if a person needs or wants to believe in a religion. But I can't totally give in to all of its claims and beliefs. And that's what's annoying... some people do go all in on Baha'is, Christianity, Islam or some belief. Then, they tell those of us that don't believe, how wrong we are, and how blind to the truth, as they see it, we are.

 

[Trailblazer]

The problem is the evidence that you choose to believe. It is sufficient for you and insufficient for all people other than Bahais.

That doesn't prove anything except that the Baha'is were able to recognize the evidence.

 

[Truthseeker]

The problem is the evidence that you choose to believe. It is sufficient for you and insufficient for all people other than Bahais.

It doesn't indicate anything about whether Baha'i is true or false. Maybe you don't see that because you don't believe in anything other than from your own inclination, it appears. You accept some truths from the Hindu religion because it resonates with you. The followers of Dharmic religions are different like that it seems to me. It does give people of Dharmic religions more tolerance usually than those of Abrahamic religions. Baha'i is a Abrahamic religion, but it appears to me that for the most part we are tolerant of other religions, including those not "officially" recognized as having a Prophet in it. I know Hindu is different because it has no single founder.

 

[ppp]

Quite clearly you miss the point I made !

Belief is a set of words in a defining arrangement that constructs a sentence . Example - I believe in God

To change my mind and belief I only have to change the arrangement of the words , Example - I don't believe in God

Words are your mind, we think in words and pictures , associating the word with a picture .

I don't brag , everyone knows Jesus was a teacher .

I didn't miss your point. I rejected it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. but it appears to me that for the most part we are tolerant of other religions, including those not "officially" recognized as having a Prophet in it.

Yeah, what else could you do? You do not have a Bahai militia at the moment controlling the world as Shoghi wanted. But you find faults in every other Abrahamic religion. Leave aside the Eastern religions, Dharmic, Chinese or Japanese, which have nothing in common with Bahais.