Can we change our mind about what we believe?

[flowerpower]

Cool, now please explain how this applies to religion.
Explain how understanding evidence is bad when it comes to religion. Explain what belief systems do better with ignorance or faith.

Okay, well you just asked a lot of me.

Studying theology is kind of a vanity discipline IMO - sort of like how the formal study of literature presents itself like a sequence of glorified book clubs with an exam at the end. I suppose there is some value in having peer reviewed and tested studies but something like spiritual or religious experience seems far too subjective and ineffable to be considered with any kind of empirical thought. I guess it might help some people? You seem to be enthusiastic about it so I guess I'm happy for you?

I didn't make the claim that "belief systems do better with ignorance or faith" so I'm not going to explain something I never said.

 

[CG Didymus]

You are mis-using logic here, twice.
Why would people go to so much trouble to write about a nonexistent God?
There is more writing about Brahman than the Quran and Bahai put together.
Books about Zeus.
The first known author and writing from ancient humans is hymns about Inana, long hymns.
Every nation had scriptures, revelations from their deity. Canaanites had El, Egypt had many gods, almost all stories involve a. god of the people writing.

Imagine you were trying to show a modern Zeus worshipper that Zeus was a made up deity in Greek religions and we now know it's fiction and they were like "details don't matter! I know it's true, I read his word and it speaks to me!".

They don't care. They should but they are emotionally attached. What you are saying is exactly the same.
Details that the Bible is using older theology, several times, the gospels are anonymous, non-eyewitness, all used Mark, all is important to understanding how it came to be.
Not for those who refuse to look at evidence. You are doing the same here. Evidence doesn't matter because you bought a claim and are now attached and cannot walk it back, no matter what.

The Baha'is don't believe the Bible literally. Baha'u'llah says that Abraham took Ishmael, not Isaac, to be sacrificed. Baha'is don't believe the resurrection of Jesus really happened. Why wouldn't they be supportive of research that showed the Bible and the NT to be made up stories with many of the things being borrowed from the religious myths of other cultures?

I think it's because what you been saying makes the Bible and the NT too made up, too fictional. They need some of it to be true and the actual teachings of a God that they believe is real.

Now for Bible-believing Christians, they don't believe in the Quran or Baha'i writings anyway. They should be perfectly fine with any research that shows that all they did is borrow and rework some old religious themes and concepts.

So, the problem they have with you is that you are taking down their religion along with those others.

 

[joelr]

Yes we all know that Abrahamic religion revolves around the One G-d.
..but 'great religions of the west' ??
Their origin is the middle-east..

No, no, no, I said all religions are from revelations. A religious dude, shaman, whatever, he gets a message from an angel, god, chupacabra, WHATEVER......? Someone gets revealed information and a movement forms around it. In those times divine revelation was the perferred way to gain knowledge. Critical thinking wasn't yet around in most societies.

Or they worship a deity and someone high up in the religion meditates and then says "the deity has spoke to me........" and they go from there.

That is super common. And always comes from the persons mind.

..deflection once again .. it is not a populous religion.

Jainism is a transtheistic religion, holding that the universe was not created, and will exist forever. It is independent, having no creator, governor, judge, or destroyer. In this, it is unlike the Abrahamic religions and the theistic strands of Hinduism, but similar to Buddhism.
- Wikipedia -

Jainism is about as populous as Zoroastrianism..
..but Budhism is the fourth populous religion at 6% of global pop. after hinduism at 15%

First of all the first time wasn't a deflection. I just used a different religion that offers guidance from God. Why do you have to be dishonest?

Then, I say Zoroastrianism was a religion with revelations, and you mention Jainiam, which is Buddhism???????????????????????????????????????

Popularity doesn't matter, I am showing you all these religions claim revelations. It's true, they all do.

The actual deflection seems to be you deflecting away from the fact that I have proven my point. Just deal with it? Revelations are very common in religions? How hard is this?

That's right .. they just threaten them with a spanking or what have you.
..and courts threaten people with loss of liberty etc.

Which says nothing to my point. The statements in the Quran about other beliefs are very angry. Sounds like hate.
You don't send your children to eternal fire because they don't believe the right religion.

No it isn't. It's reality, but you do not perceive.
A junkie might understand better than you!

Yes, it's reality that other religions and having alternate beliefs are hated on. Horrible doom, eternal fire. You cannot get more hate than that.

Nothing in that book is reality because you have provided no evidence. Only claims and make believe stories about angels.

And as usual, a junkie can understand better than me, BUT you cannot explain why, explain any point, make it clear, explain your position.......

maybe a junkie could do that for you?

You are merely projecting your insecurities on me.
You can believe whatever you choose.

Oh, really? You won't use special pleading? So, the OT is all corrupt and doesn't say what the original authors intended.

How do you know the Quran isn't also corrupt in the same way?


(here comes the special pleading.....)

Again, you can believe what you like .. you don't like what it says, so "it must be wrong".

Wow, someone actually gave this a "win"? Have you heard about logic, evidence, critical thinking.......ring any bells.....no?


So here we have a statement saying I don't like what the Quran says so I come to the conclusion "it must be wrong".
Yet, he knows this isn't true, he knows I'm talking about EVIDENCE that the Quran was constructed over several centuries.
I don't believe that because I "want to" or because of anything the Quran says.

I believe it........BECAUSE OF THE EVIDENCE. You are and have been, so insanely dishonest that I need a shower right now. And that is a win? You just lie over and over, that is someone's "win" standard?

Sanaa manuscript - a palimpset is a document that is found to have older writing on it. One containing pre-versions of the Quran was found. Indicating that in 5 AD (by dating methods), it was begun to be worked on. It was a work in progress, not a revelation.

Sanaa manuscript - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Sanaa palimpsest (also Ṣanʽā’ 1 or DAM 01-27.1) or Sanaa Quran is one of the oldest Quranic manuscripts in existence.[1] Part of a sizable cache of Quranic and non-Quranic fragments discovered in Yemen during a 1972 restoration of the Great Mosque of Sanaa, the manuscript was identified as a palimpsest Quran in 1981 as it is written on parchment and comprises two layers of text. The upper text largely conforms to the standard 'Uthmanic' Quran in text and in the standard order of chapters (suwar, singular sūrah), whereas the lower text (the original text that was erased and written over by the upper text, but can still be read with the help of ultraviolet light and computer processing) contains many variations from the standard text, and the sequence of its chapters corresponds to no known Quranic order. A partial reconstruction of the lower text was published in 2012,[2] and a reconstruction of the legible portions of both lower and upper texts of the 38 folios in the Sana'a House of Manuscripts was published in 2017 utilising post-processed digital images of the lower text.[3] A radiocarbon analysis has dated the parchment of one of the detached leaves sold at auction, and hence its lower text, to between 578 CE (44 BH) and 669 CE (49 AH) with a 95% accuracy.[4]

 

[joelr]

Okay, well you just asked a lot of me.

You can pick one if you like.

Studying theology is kind of a vanity discipline IMO - sort of like how the formal study of literature presents itself like a sequence of glorified book clubs with an exam at the end. I suppose there is some value in having peer reviewed and tested studies but something like spiritual or religious experience seems far too subjective and ineffable to be considered with any kind of empirical thought. I guess it might help some people? You seem to be enthusiastic about it so I guess I'm happy for you?

I'm not talking about theology? Maybe you were just agreeing with the statement "You've studied so much, and learned so little. How is that possible?" in a general sense. But it was pointed at me so I am objecting to its use here.
I'm talking about learning critical-history and how it impacts what we can know about a religion. It has nothing to do with theology which is a study of the words and what they mean as if they were from a deity.
For starters there is no evidence of any deity in any sense. But what we are looking at in historical studies I'll let a historian explain:


The historical-critical approach has a different set of concerns and
therefore poses a different set of questions. At the heart of this ap¬
proach is the historical question (hence its name) of what the biblical
writings meant in their original historical context. Who were the
actual authors of the Bible? Is it possible (yes!) that some of the au¬
thors of some of the biblical books were not in fact who they claimed,
or were claimed, to be—say, that 1 Timothy was not actually writ¬
ten by Paul, or that Genesis was not written by Moses? When did
these authors live? What were the circumstances under which they
wrote? What issues were they trying to address in their own day?
How were they affected by the cultural and historical assumptions
of their time? What sources did these authors use? When were these
sources produced? Is it possible that the perspectives of these sources
differed from one another? Is it possible that the authors who used
these sources had different perspectives, both from their sources and
from one another? Is it possible that the books of the Bible, based on
a variety of sources, have internal contradictions? That there are ir¬
reconcilable differences among them? And is it possible that what the
books originally meant in their original context is not what they are
taken to mean today? That our interpretations of Scripture involve
taking its words out of context and thereby distorting its message?


And what if we don’t even have the original words? What if,
during the centuries in which the Bible—both the Old Testament,
in Hebrew, and the New Testament, in Greek—was copied by hand,
the words were changed by well-meaning but careless scribes, or by
fully alert scribes who wanted to alter the texts in order to make
them say what they wanted them to say?
These are among the many, many questions raised by the historical-
critical method. No wonder entering seminarians have to prepare for
“baby Bible” exams even before they could begin a serious study of
the Bible. This kind of study presupposes that you know what you’re
talking about before you start talking about it.



We are also looking at archaeology and it tells us a lot about what the early believers actually believed, the actual size of the kingdoms, did wars actually happen, did the culture actually emerge from Egypt or somewhere else? (yes, Canaan).

and comparative religion where we see the same myths and tales which helps understand where they came from, what was changed and why, what trends were popular, as well as what historians say like Josephus,

I didn't make the claim that "belief systems do better with ignorance or faith" so I'm not going to explain something I never said.

"You've studied so much, and learned so little. How is that possible?"


"I've found that such a thing is actually an all too common phenomenon."

Restless was making a dig at me in the original statement. I may have read too deep into your comment above.

 

[joelr]

You cannot see the tree because you are lost in the forest.

You think that the more you KNOW about a religion the closer you will get to finding the truth about that religion, but what actually happens is that you completely lose sight of the tree (religion) because it gets lost in the forest of trees (details about a religion that don't really matter) ...

You have already USED THIS METAPHOR, and it didn't say anything. So I explained the issues and asked you to explain (without the already used metaphor) exactly what I am not seeing?

I also detailed several aspects about the religion, some are wrong, some are completely with no evidence, claims that require amazing evidence (like a resurrection) and others that I find to be low level writing techniques with low level messages. I broke it down.
Again, am I supposed to overlook all this because some "big picture" is happening? I don't think it is.


Just like a Mormon can say to you that you don't see the "big picture"? Actually, yes you do. Joe Smith was a con-man. HE has no evidence, the witnesses may be in on it, the historical information doesn't line up, the thing about Indians being red because of sin............it's all stuff that isn't going to work for you.
Same here. There is no big picture?

So go ahead, you explain the big picture because I don't see any such thing. I believe what you mean is you use confirmation bias to assume it's true and ignore all the stuff I mentioned and when you tell yourself it's real you get an excited feeling like you know a special truth.
That is the only take I have. Maybe you find his writing complex? I don't. I find him to be filling space and giving vague new-age 1800s spiritual answers.

Maybe you think all that knowledge is going to get you closer to the Truth about God or the Baha'i Faith, but what happens is the exact opposite.
Knowledge can be a veil preventing recognition of Baha’u’llah because people who think they know everything are often haughty and vainglorious. Some of the most pure souls were uneducated.

Maybe you think studying all the facts about Joeseph smith and the golden plates and the Mormon Bible will get you closer to the truth.
But it's actually the exact opposite, you get lead away from Mormonism because, yes Smith was a con-man and yes the evidence is terrible, but if you can just use a bias and say "it's all true" you will believe it in your heart. Don't be haughty and vainglorious, don't look into facts and evidenece. Just join and believe and you will feel free and the presence of god also!

It's just as silly when you say the same about Mormonism.

This is cult talk. Any time someone tells you that knowledge makes you words that basically equal a DILETTANTE, they are trying to brainwash you. No true thing fears knowledge. No true movement fears breaking down aspects of the teachings and seeing if they match reality. Or looking for actual evidence that they are real, supernatural, never.
Something true will never be afraid of critical thinking and empirical thought.

I don't think that is your aim, I suspect you were taught to think like that. But you are making excuses for the religion, excuses as to why it makes bad prophecies, uninspired writings, mostly copied from older wisdom, nothing new, and especially ZERO evidence.


Now, pure souls? Pure souls were uneducated? Ok. I didn't say you needed an education to be a good person? What the flying heck does that have to do with Mormonism or Bahai being actually true???????????????



And no I do not think knowledge will get me closer to god because god is a fiction. Feel free to demonstrate evidence for god.
But the Bahai faith, yes. Once again, please explain how understanding all prophecies were insanely wrong isn't a clue?
Explain how lack of evidence isn't a clue? Or finding the writings to be mundane to be helpful?

And why is it not SO HYPOCRITICAL that you judge Mormonism, and all other religions the SAME WAY I JUDGE BAHAI, as made up. Yet when I do it to your religion you special plead over and over. Now you special plead that logic and evidenece - knowledge is a waste of time.

After you explain the big picture, maybe you can explain how you should go into a religion without knowledge?

Funny thing is, you probably joined after your own investigations. You just bought into it. But when I do it and don't buy it it's the wrong move. Tap-dancing, word salad, nonsense.


"Knowledge can be a veil preventing recognition of Baha’u’llah because people who think they know everything are often haughty and vainglorious."

Going back, who gave the links to :

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 179-183

reference.bahai.org

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

A collection of transcriptions of table talks given by ‘Abdu’l‑Bahá in ‘Akká between 1904 and 1906 in response to questions posed by Laura Dreyfus-Barney, an American Bahá’í resident in Paris, and first published in 1908. The new edition, extensively retranslated, was published in 2014.

www.bahai.org

Yup, you did. Who read them? Yup, I did. And now look what I get, because I used them to learn about the religion. let's look again - ""Knowledge can be a veil preventing recognition of Baha’u’llah because people who think they know everything are often haughty and vainglorious."


You didn't say that when you gave links and said "the evidence is here"? Odd? But now that I reviewed the evidence and found a ton of mistakes. Suddenly the goal post has been moved.
You give me the knowledge, when I use it and find it lacking and unconvincing, NOW those with knowledge are "
haughty and vainglorious."


Man, I am so tired of dishonest arguments.

“Know verily that Knowledge is of two kinds: Divine and Satanic.

Oh wow, Hellenism and Persian thought, did we need more updates on that?

The one welleth out from the fountain of divine inspiration; the other is but a reflection of vain and obscure thoughts. The source of the former is God Himself; the motive-force of the latter the whisperings of selfish desire. The one is guided by the principle: “Fear ye God; God will teach you;” 29 the other is but a confirmation of the truth: “Knowledge is the most grievous veil between man and his Creator.” The former bringeth forth the fruit of patience, of longing desire, of true understanding, and love; whilst the latter can yield naught but arrogance, vainglory and conceit.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 69

So re-wording James 3:13 is supposed to impress me?

Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good life let him show
his works in the meekness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and
selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth.
This wisdom is not such as comes down from above, but is earthly,
unspiritual, devilish. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist,
there will be disorder and every vile practice. But wisdom from above is
first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good
fruits, without uncertainty or insincerity. And the harvest of
righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.


Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 41-80

“We have forbidden men to walk after the imaginations of their hearts, that they may be enabled to recognize Him Who is the sovereign Source and Object of all knowledge, and may acknowledge whatsoever He may be pleased to reveal. Witness how they have entangled themselves with their idle fancies and vain imaginations. By My life! They are themselves the victims of what their own hearts have devised, and yet they perceive it not. Vain and profitless is the talk of their lips, and yet they understand not.” Gleanings, pp. 204-205

2 Timothy
For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.



quran - The Cow
Allah has closed their hearts’ ears and denied them intellectual sense of hearing, and their minds' eyes grow dim as if covered with a film; they are disposed to denseness of intellect and shall suffer a fitting punishment
2:8 Among people are those who pretend to believe in Allah, give credence to His Omnipotence and Authority and acknowledge the truth of the Hereafter while in fact they hug their old irreverent conviction to their hearts
2:9 They apply their minds to deceiving Allah, AL-'Alim (the Omniscient), Who knows what is secretly suggested to the mind, and to deceive those whose hearts have been impressed with the image of religious and spiritual virtues, when in fact, they only deceive themselves, failing to perceive
2:10 Their ill-natured hearts reflect the morbidity inherent in their innermost being, and consequently did Allah make their seats of intellect melt away in disease and lassitude that they addicted themselves to vice, and there awaits them a fitting punishment for their intentional assertion of what is false


not progressive, in fact, he just took the Bible and Quran and rewrote verse.
I think this is as fake as all the rest.

 

[joelr]

The Baha'is don't believe the Bible literally. Baha'u'llah says that Abraham took Ishmael, not Isaac, to be sacrificed. Baha'is don't believe the resurrection of Jesus really happened. Why wouldn't they be supportive of research that showed the Bible and the NT to be made up stories with many of the things being borrowed from the religious myths of other cultures?

I think it's because what you been saying makes the Bible and the NT too made up, too fictional. They need some of it to be true and the actual teachings of a God that they believe is real.

Now for Bible-believing Christians, they don't believe in the Quran or Baha'i writings anyway. They should be perfectly fine with any research that shows that all they did is borrow and rework some old religious themes and concepts.

So, the problem they have with you is that you are taking down their religion along with those others.

Yes, Yahweh is still the God in Bahai and he cannot be a made up deity. Jesus has to be a messenger, so all the resurrection stuff is a Greek corruption. So they have to say that tracks but the entire Gospel message is all wrong. Oddly they still quote certain verses?

Sounds like Bahai is going with the Islamic interpretation of the Bible unless the Bahai prophet makes some changes, then they follow that.
But the Quran doesn't say any messengers will come for a long time. It's like a Islamic version of Mormonism.

The Bahai discussion is a nightmare of goalpost moving. It started with "here are the books with evidence", now it's you think studying and knowledge will make you understand, but you don't see the right picture???
What a mess?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Popularity doesn't matter, I am showing you all these religions claim revelations. It's true, they all do.

No, they do not .. and of course popularity matters .. there are 1000's of obscure religions.

Revelations are very common in religions?

Of course, that is true .. but not ALL, as you previously claimed.

Which says nothing to my point. The statements in the Quran about other beliefs are very angry. Sounds like hate..

You would think that the sun "hates you", if you were exposed in the desert.

And as usual, a junkie can understand better than me, BUT you cannot explain why, explain any point, make it clear, explain your position.......

..as I say, you do not perceive
hint: the horrors of withdrawal from strong opioids .. burning hell

So here we have a statement saying I don't like what the Quran says so I come to the conclusion "it must be wrong".
Yet, he knows this isn't true..

I have a gut-feeling that it could be true .. you either don't like what it says, or
you don't understand what it says.

You make it all about "evidence", but ignore what the text actually says???

Sanaa manuscript - a palimpset is a document that is found to have older writing on it..

It really doesn't matter .. unless you can demonstrate what has actually changed from original.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Just how sure are Baha'is? As you probably know and have posted on one of the threads dealing with having a "belief" in a religion being true but not "claiming" it is true. I really, really find it hard to believe that any Baha'i isn't sure enough to step and claim it to the world, "Baha'u'llah is the promised one from God.

Some of us here have a problem with religious people claiming there is a God. They want to know what proof and evidence there is. And, as I'm sure you know, the Baha'i evidence does not satisfy them. But even people that do believe in God have a similar question, "How do you know the God you claim to real is in fact real? What proof and evidence do you have? Plus, what proof and evidence do you have that your prophet, Baha'u'llah, is really Christ returned?"

Some of us here have been involved with several religions. All of them have changed people's lives. There are always some people in any of the many religions that is in "awe" and they feel so blessed to be one of the chosen few. Yet, as I've said several times, they all believe in something different. Even how they define their God might be and probably is different.

One example that I'm sure you understand is the born-again Christians. They "know" Jesus is their savior. They know they've been saved from their sins and from going to hell. They know that Jesus rose from the dead and conquered death. They know that he is God in the flesh and part of the trinity. And they know they must be diligent to keep from falling prey to Satan and his deceptive ways.

They know it. They claim. But, if the Baha'i beliefs are correct, most of what they believe is not true, or at least not "literally" true. Yet, those beliefs have changed their lives. How is that possible? I think that in many ways, it doesn't matter what religious beliefs a person has, as long as they believe it. Does that make it true? No. But for them, it is true. Can they prove it? Can they give some evidence and reasons why they believe? Yes. Is it good enough for you? I doubt it. You have your own beliefs which include why literal-believing Christians are wrong. Is it good enough for a skeptic? No, they need more tangible proof. But it's not there.

And the greatest proof, knowing in your heart, depends on believing by faith. But that faith can be in a religion, like those born-again Christians, that doesn't really have the truth. Unfortunately, without that tangible, objective truth, the Baha'i Faith is put in there with those Christians. You both "know" it in your heart. You believe it. You live by its teachings. But you're living and believing completely different things. And each believes the other one is wrong.

As you probably know we cannot know God directly. So what is meant by ‘knowing God’ is meant His Manifestations Who are God’s Representatives on earth. So to know, believe and obey the Manifestations is to know and worship God. Some Manifestations are Christ, Muhammad, Moses and Baha’u’llah so to know Them is to know God.

The only thing the Bahá’í’s are saying is that the promises recorded in their scriptures regarding the return of their Messiah have been fulfilled with the appearance of Baha’u’llah and He explained the interpretation of many symbolic terms in the Bible.

Christ’s first coming

Dan 7:13 I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven

Christ was born in a manger according to the texts. He never came literally on any clouds from the sky or heaven.

Mark 14:62 And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven

Fast forward to the Gospels and we see the same interpretations being placed on the second coming that never occurred literally in the first coming so another meaning is intended for things like ’heaven’ ‘clouds’ and ‘all shall see him’ other than what people have gleaned from the leaders of their faith. Baha’u’llah explained many of these terms in the Book of Certitude which we are told is the Book which unsealed the books.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Just how sure are Baha'is? As you probably know and have posted on one of the threads dealing with having a "belief" in a religion being true but not "claiming" it is true. I really, really find it hard to believe that any Baha'i isn't sure enough to step and claim it to the world, "Baha'u'llah is the promised one from God.

Some of us here have a problem with religious people claiming there is a God. They want to know what proof and evidence there is. And, as I'm sure you know, the Baha'i evidence does not satisfy them. But even people that do believe in God have a similar question, "How do you know the God you claim to real is in fact real? What proof and evidence do you have? Plus, what proof and evidence do you have that your prophet, Baha'u'llah, is really Christ returned?"

Some of us here have been involved with several religions. All of them have changed people's lives. There are always some people in any of the many religions that is in "awe" and they feel so blessed to be one of the chosen few. Yet, as I've said several times, they all believe in something different. Even how they define their God might be and probably is different.

One example that I'm sure you understand is the born-again Christians. They "know" Jesus is their savior. They know they've been saved from their sins and from going to hell. They know that Jesus rose from the dead and conquered death. They know that he is God in the flesh and part of the trinity. And they know they must be diligent to keep from falling prey to Satan and his deceptive ways.

They know it. They claim. But, if the Baha'i beliefs are correct, most of what they believe is not true, or at least not "literally" true. Yet, those beliefs have changed their lives. How is that possible? I think that in many ways, it doesn't matter what religious beliefs a person has, as long as they believe it. Does that make it true? No. But for them, it is true. Can they prove it? Can they give some evidence and reasons why they believe? Yes. Is it good enough for you? I doubt it. You have your own beliefs which include why literal-believing Christians are wrong. Is it good enough for a skeptic? No, they need more tangible proof. But it's not there.

And the greatest proof, knowing in your heart, depends on believing by faith. But that faith can be in a religion, like those born-again Christians, that doesn't really have the truth. Unfortunately, without that tangible, objective truth, the Baha'i Faith is put in there with those Christians. You both "know" it in your heart. You believe it. You live by its teachings. But you're living and believing completely different things. And each believes the other one is wrong.

It’s not a matter of who is right or wrong. Christians are right to believe in Christ. But many, not all Christians, including Christian clergy have accepted Baha’u’llah as the return of Christ in the glory of the Father so just because the majority have not yet accepted Him does not mean they won’t, as it is said in the Bible “all eyes shall see Him” giving no timeframe. It took centuries before all mankind saw the greatness of Christ. In the beginning it was a tiny group being persecuted like Baha’is today.

I was born a Christian with a Christian upbringing and I see my expectations of Christ’s return fulfilled by Baha’u’llah. Am I to be castigated for coming to this conclusion as a Christian? it’s not an ‘us vs them’ situation but more one of Christians gradually awakening to the fact Christ has returned. Some of us former Christians have awoken early, others are awakening now and many more will awaken in much larger numbers in the future.

 

[Trailblazer]

Christ’s first coming

Dan 7:13 I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven

Mark 14:62 And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven

Are you saying that you believe these verses refer to Christ's first coming?
I believe that these verses refer to Christ's second coming, which was Baha'u'llah.

Christians believe that the following verses are about Jesus, but if Jesus was the Son of man, as Jesus claimed to be, the following verses cannot be about the Jesus. Jesus was not 'One like the Son of man.' Jesus was the Son of man.

Daniel 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

I believe that these verses are about Baha'u'llah who was one like Jesus, who was the Son of man.
Baha''u'llah was 'the return of the Son of man' since He was the return of Christ.

Jesus ascended into heaven in the clouds. Baha’u’llah, one like the son of man, descended from the clouds of heaven of the Will of God, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. These verses are about an earthly Kingdom, not a heavenly Kingdom. Jesus’ Kingdom is in heaven, Baha’u’llah’s Kingdom will be on earth, after it is built by humans.

Mark 14
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

In verse 62 Jesus conceded to being the Son of God when He said "I am."
Then Jesus said that we would see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

The tricky part is that Jesus was the Son of God but He was also the Son of man, and Baha'u'llah was the return of the Son of man, since He was the return of Christ.

Who is the Son of man who will come in the clouds of heaven?

Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven.means that the return of Christ will appear in the form of another human being. The term “clouds” as used in the Bible means those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Just like the physical clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, these things hindered men from recognizing the return of Christ.

In other words, the judgment of most people was clouded when Christ returned and it is still clouded for most people.

One thing that clouds the judgment of Christians is their desire for the same Jesus to return to earth.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Are you saying that you believe these verses refer to Christ's first coming?
I believe that these verses refer to Christ's second coming, which was Baha'u'llah.

Christians believe that the following verses are about Jesus, but if Jesus was the Son of man, as Jesus claimed to be, the following verses cannot be about the Jesus. Jesus was not 'One like the Son of man.' Jesus was the Son of man.

Daniel 7:13-14 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

I believe that these verses are about Baha'u'llah who was one like Jesus, who was the Son of man.
Baha''u'llah was 'the return of the Son of man' since He was the return of Christ.

Jesus ascended into heaven in the clouds. Baha’u’llah, one like the son of man, descended from the clouds of heaven of the Will of God, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. These verses are about an earthly Kingdom, not a heavenly Kingdom. Jesus’ Kingdom is in heaven, Baha’u’llah’s Kingdom will be on earth, after it is built by humans.

Mark 14
61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

In verse 62 Jesus conceded to being the Son of God when He said "I am."
Then Jesus said that we would see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

The tricky part is that Jesus was the Son of God but He was also the Son of man, and Baha'u'llah was the return of the Son of man, since He was the return of Christ.

Who is the Son of man who will come in the clouds of heaven?

Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven.means that the return of Christ will appear in the form of another human being. The term “clouds” as used in the Bible means those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Just like the physical clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, these things hindered men from recognizing the return of Christ.

In other words, the judgment of most people was clouded when Christ returned and it is still clouded for most people.

One thing that clouds the judgment of Christians is their desire for the same Jesus to return to earth.

My point is about Christian interpretation. Daniel does not specify whether he is speaking about the first or second coming. Christians believe it refers to Christ period but interpret clouds and heaven differently for the first and second coming. Those who believe it speaks of both, interpret the first coming in ‘clouds’ and ‘heaven’ figuratively but the second coming literally. Baha’u’llah also explains the symbolic meanings and that there are not just one meaning intended in the Words of God. Christians use figurative such as ‘let the dead bury the dead’ and explain it is not literal but because they want to explain away Baha’u’llah they say the prophecies must be literal even though some of the first coming prophecies they interpret symbolically. The bias taught them that all other prophets must be false is exposed clearly when we see them interpreting intentionally literally to exclude the possibility of Baha’u’llah being true yet will compromise on prophecies regarding Christ because they feel the need to exalt Christ above all the other Manifestations. It’s a matter of how they interpret not what we believe. And for them Baha’u’llah never enters the equation because they are educated to interpret Him out of their calculations.

 

[CG Didymus]

You have already USED THIS METAPHOR, and it didn't say anything. So I explained the issues and asked you to explain (without the already used metaphor) exactly what I am not seeing?

I also detailed several aspects about the religion, some are wrong, some are completely with no evidence, claims that require amazing evidence (like a resurrection) and others that I find to be low level writing techniques with low level messages. I broke it down.
Again, am I supposed to overlook all this because some "big picture" is happening? I don't think it is.


Just like a Mormon can say to you that you don't see the "big picture"? Actually, yes you do. Joe Smith was a con-man. HE has no evidence, the witnesses may be in on it, the historical information doesn't line up, the thing about Indians being red because of sin............it's all stuff that isn't going to work for you.
Same here. There is no big picture?

So go ahead, you explain the big picture because I don't see any such thing. I believe what you mean is you use confirmation bias to assume it's true and ignore all the stuff I mentioned and when you tell yourself it's real you get an excited feeling like you know a special truth.
That is the only take I have. Maybe you find his writing complex? I don't. I find him to be filling space and giving vague new-age 1800s spiritual answers.








Maybe you think studying all the facts about Joeseph smith and the golden plates and the Mormon Bible will get you closer to the truth.
But it's actually the exact opposite, you get lead away from Mormonism because, yes Smith was a con-man and yes the evidence is terrible, but if you can just use a bias and say "it's all true" you will believe it in your heart. Don't be haughty and vainglorious, don't look into facts and evidenece. Just join and believe and you will feel free and the presence of god also!

It's just as silly when you say the same about Mormonism.

This is cult talk. Any time someone tells you that knowledge makes you words that basically equal a DILETTANTE, they are trying to brainwash you. No true thing fears knowledge. No true movement fears breaking down aspects of the teachings and seeing if they match reality. Or looking for actual evidence that they are real, supernatural, never.
Something true will never be afraid of critical thinking and empirical thought.

I don't think that is your aim, I suspect you were taught to think like that. But you are making excuses for the religion, excuses as to why it makes bad prophecies, uninspired writings, mostly copied from older wisdom, nothing new, and especially ZERO evidence.


Now, pure souls? Pure souls were uneducated? Ok. I didn't say you needed an education to be a good person? What the flying heck does that have to do with Mormonism or Bahai being actually true???????????????



And no I do not think knowledge will get me closer to god because god is a fiction. Feel free to demonstrate evidence for god.
But the Bahai faith, yes. Once again, please explain how understanding all prophecies were insanely wrong isn't a clue?
Explain how lack of evidence isn't a clue? Or finding the writings to be mundane to be helpful?

And why is it not SO HYPOCRITICAL that you judge Mormonism, and all other religions the SAME WAY I JUDGE BAHAI, as made up. Yet when I do it to your religion you special plead over and over. Now you special plead that logic and evidenece - knowledge is a waste of time.

After you explain the big picture, maybe you can explain how you should go into a religion without knowledge?

Funny thing is, you probably joined after your own investigations. You just bought into it. But when I do it and don't buy it it's the wrong move. Tap-dancing, word salad, nonsense.


"Knowledge can be a veil preventing recognition of Baha’u’llah because people who think they know everything are often haughty and vainglorious."

Going back, who gave the links to :

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 179-183

reference.bahai.org

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

A collection of transcriptions of table talks given by ‘Abdu’l‑Bahá in ‘Akká between 1904 and 1906 in response to questions posed by Laura Dreyfus-Barney, an American Bahá’í resident in Paris, and first published in 1908. The new edition, extensively retranslated, was published in 2014.

www.bahai.org

Yup, you did. Who read them? Yup, I did. And now look what I get, because I used them to learn about the religion. let's look again - ""Knowledge can be a veil preventing recognition of Baha’u’llah because people who think they know everything are often haughty and vainglorious."


You didn't say that when you gave links and said "the evidence is here"? Odd? But now that I reviewed the evidence and found a ton of mistakes. Suddenly the goal post has been moved.
You give me the knowledge, when I use it and find it lacking and unconvincing, NOW those with knowledge are "
haughty and vainglorious."


Man, I am so tired of dishonest arguments.




Oh wow, Hellenism and Persian thought, did we need more updates on that?




So re-wording James 3:13 is supposed to impress me?

Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good life let him show
his works in the meekness of wisdom. But if you have bitter jealousy and
selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast and be false to the truth.
This wisdom is not such as comes down from above, but is earthly,
unspiritual, devilish. For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist,
there will be disorder and every vile practice. But wisdom from above is
first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good
fruits, without uncertainty or insincerity. And the harvest of
righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace.


Bahá'í Reference Library - The Kitáb-i-Íqán, Pages 41-80

2 Timothy
For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.



quran - The Cow
Allah has closed their hearts’ ears and denied them intellectual sense of hearing, and their minds' eyes grow dim as if covered with a film; they are disposed to denseness of intellect and shall suffer a fitting punishment
2:8 Among people are those who pretend to believe in Allah, give credence to His Omnipotence and Authority and acknowledge the truth of the Hereafter while in fact they hug their old irreverent conviction to their hearts
2:9 They apply their minds to deceiving Allah, AL-'Alim (the Omniscient), Who knows what is secretly suggested to the mind, and to deceive those whose hearts have been impressed with the image of religious and spiritual virtues, when in fact, they only deceive themselves, failing to perceive
2:10 Their ill-natured hearts reflect the morbidity inherent in their innermost being, and consequently did Allah make their seats of intellect melt away in disease and lassitude that they addicted themselves to vice, and there awaits them a fitting punishment for their intentional assertion of what is false


not progressive, in fact, he just took the Bible and Quran and rewrote verse.
I think this is as fake as all the rest.

The big picture of the Baha'i Faith is pretty good. World peace, equality for all, no more racism and so on. But... is the big picture the distraction, and people are not paying attention to the details? It happened with Christianity. Probably with Islam too. The Baha'i Faith works for many Baha'is, but for others it didn't work, and they dropped out. Are there problems in the details? And how will we know, if we don't examine the details, beliefs and claims of the religion? We can look at the "forest" that is the Baha'i Faith but also look at the trees. And I think we should also do a little digging at the roots of some of those trees.

 

[CG Didymus]

My point is about Christian interpretation. Daniel does not specify whether he is speaking about the first or second coming. Christians believe it refers to Christ period but interpret clouds and heaven differently for the first and second coming. Those who believe it speaks of both, interpret the first coming in ‘clouds’ and ‘heaven’ figuratively but the second coming literally. Baha’u’llah also explains the symbolic meanings and that there are not just one meaning intended in the Words of God. Christians use figurative such as ‘let the dead bury the dead’ and explain it is not literal but because they want to explain away Baha’u’llah they say the prophecies must be literal even though some of the first coming prophecies they interpret symbolically. The bias taught them that all other prophets must be false is exposed clearly when we see them interpreting intentionally literally to exclude the possibility of Baha’u’llah being true yet will compromise on prophecies regarding Christ because they feel the need to exalt Christ above all the other Manifestations. It’s a matter of how they interpret not what we believe. And for them Baha’u’llah never enters the equation because they are educated to interpret Him out of their calculations.

And Baha'is make some things figurative that the gospel writers, I think, meant to be literal. But here's a story that Baha'is do take literal, the virgin birth. But there's a problem... Are the stories in Matthew and Luke literally true? Or... is the birth story in the Quran, where Mary gives birth to Jesus under a date palm, true?

To me, there were very likely made-up stories. Was there really a census that required Joseph and Mary to go from Nazareth to Bethlehem? Was there really a star that guided the Magi to the baby Jesus? Did an angel appear to some shepherds? Great stories. Call them literally true, call the figurative, call them whatever you like. But why not fiction?

 

[joelr]

No, they do not .. and of course popularity matters .. there are 1000's of obscure religions.

Which of the religions I mentioned do not have revelations?

Of course, that is true .. but not ALL, as you previously claimed.

Which religion doesn't? Why would it matter if there were a few outlyers? The main source of religious knowledge is a religious figure gets revelations. Then, they encounter new ideas from another religion and the religious figure eventually goes......."I have new revelations"

Why is this an issue?

You would think that the sun "hates you", if you were exposed in the desert.

That would be actual deflection. The Quran sounds to hate disbelievers and other religions. (Allah will make disbelievers' lives miserable in this world and torture them forever after they die.). HATE's them.

Skeptic's Annotated Bible / Quran / Book of Mormon

skepticsannotatedbible.com

1. "Show us the straight path, The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray." Muslims generally interpret "those whom Allah has favored," "those who earn Allah's anger," and "those who go astray" as Muslims, Jews, and Christians, respectively. 1:6
2. Allah has revealed "clear tokens." Only evil people are disbelievers. 0:0
3. Don't bother warning the disbelievers. Allah has made it impossible for them to believe so that he can torture them forever after they die. 2:6
4. Allah has sickened the hearts of disbelievers and increased their disease. He is a spiritual anti-doctor. 2:10
5. Allah has blinded the disbelievers. "Allah taketh away their light and leaveth them in darkness, where they cannot see, Deaf, dumb and blind." 2:17
6. If you try to compose a surah that is better than those in the Quran, and then fail, Allah will burn you forever in the fire that he has prepared for disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones. 2:24
7. They who disbelieve, and deny Our revelations, such are rightful Peoples of the Fire. They will abide therein." 2:39
8. Allah stamped wretchedness upon the Jews because they killed the prophets and disbelieved Allah's revelations. 2:61
9. Allah turned Sabbath-breaking Jews into apes to be despised and hated. All modern Jews are descendants of apes (or all modern apes are descendants of Sabbath-breaking Jews). 2:65
10. Christians and Jews (who believe in only part of the Scripture), will suffer in this life and go to hell in the next. 2:85
11. "Allah has cursed them for their unbelief." Because I disbelieve in his bull****, Allah has cursed me, along with nearly six billion other non-Muslims. 2:88
12. The curse of Allah is on disbelievers. 2:89
13. "They have incurred anger upon anger. For disbelievers is a shameful doom." 2:90
14. Jews are the greediest of all humankind. They'd like to live 1000 years. But even that "would by no means remove the doom." 2:96
15. Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers. 2:98
16. "For disbelievers is a painful doom." 2:104
17. Don't question anything Muhammed says or choose disbelief over faith. 2:108
18. The Jews and Christians know damn well that the Muslims are right, so they try to make Muslims disbelievers because they envy the truth that they know the Muslims have. 2:109
19. Allah will make disbelievers' lives miserable in this world and torture them forever after they die. 2:114
20. "And thou wilt not be asked about the owners of hell-fire." (They are the non-muslims.) 2:119
21. Disbelievers are losers. 2:121
22. Allah will leave the disbelievers alone for a while, but then he will compel them to the doom of Fire. 2:126

..as I say, you do not perceive
hint: the horrors of withdrawal from strong opioids .. burning hell

Oh, hell, yeah that is a myth the Jewish religion took from Persia. When it was imported into Christianity and Islam it's still a myth.

You also don't experience withdrawal after your brain and nerves are gone. You experience nothing.

But if you have evidence of hell than demonstrate hell.

I have a gut-feeling that it could be true .. you either don't like what it says, or
you don't understand what it says.

You make it all about "evidence", but ignore what the text actually says???

Because I don't care what something that claims to be from an angel says until you demonstrate, angels are real, God is real, an angel actually spoke these words....the Jewish Bible is real and not more mythology.

The evidence in the real world is that the Quran was composed over a long period of time and the revelations story, like Mormonism or any other , is false.

Those bad apologetics can be used by any religion. "you just don't understand Mormonism, you don't get what it is saying because you don't believe...." Blah blah

The text isn't that hard to interpret? It was written by people.

It really doesn't matter .. unless you can demonstrate what has actually changed from original.

Yes many early versions of the text are in a pre-version. That is what is seen
It doesn't matter to me? I don't buy the stories about the Quran? Of course it was probably worked on for a long time.


But I'm not studying a palimpset to present you with evidence which you will 100% hand wave off, not sure exactly how, some form of dishonesty-
that is just scholars opinion
satan made that
Jinns made that
disbelievers interpret that

some nonsense apologetics that don't make sense. I don't care? I don't believe magic books? You don't care about truth so you are not going to study that. I've been fooled too many times here, this is not a discussion.

 

[joelr]

The big picture of the Baha'i Faith is pretty good. World peace, equality for all, no more racism and so on. But... is the big picture the distraction, and people are not paying attention to the details? It happened with Christianity. Probably with Islam too. The Baha'i Faith works for many Baha'is, but for others it didn't work, and they dropped out. Are there problems in the details? And how will we know, if we don't examine the details, beliefs and claims of the religion? We can look at the "forest" that is the Baha'i Faith but also look at the trees. And I think we should also do a little digging at the roots of some of those trees.

Beliefs should be put through a logical, rational, skeptical process before they are accepted. No religion should get a pass. I find many religious people who genuinely don't understand they are using fallacies and special pleading to justify their beliefs. But then we get all types of manipulation in the media, voter fraud, pandemic knowledge, moon landing, Trump is the savior, and the lack of critical thinking doesn't give people a chance to understand what is actually true. New movements can arise as well that could be harmful. So people should be armed with tools to test beliefs. Any new prophet can arise at any time and if the standards of evidence are that low than that can be a problem

I have no idea what this "forrest" lie of argument means? It remains unexplained. I have no idea why details about the religion wouldn't matter or why knowledge would make one misled? In all cases knowledge is what helps you determine if something is true.
I suspect "big picture" means, read the scripture and get a "feeling" that you associate with a god speaking. Which happens in every religion, is just phycology and even Mormonism takes advantage of in Moroni:

And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
(Ask God if these things are true.
If you ask with a sincere heart, he will show you its truth by the power of the Holy Ghost. [2])
6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.

What it really means is is you believe first, then ask, you will get feelings that a deity is confirming this to you. It's the power of self-deception.

 

[loverofhumanity]

And Baha'is make some things figurative that the gospel writers, I think, meant to be literal. But here's a story that Baha'is do take literal, the virgin birth. But there's a problem... Are the stories in Matthew and Luke literally true? Or... is the birth story in the Quran, where Mary gives birth to Jesus under a date palm, true?

To me, there were very likely made-up stories. Was there really a census that required Joseph and Mary to go from Nazareth to Bethlehem? Was there really a star that guided the Magi to the baby Jesus? Did an angel appear to some shepherds? Great stories. Call them literally true, call the figurative, call them whatever you like. But why not fiction?

With regards to the interpretation of Biblical prophecies it is written very clearly that….

Daniel 12:9

And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

And in Revelation 5:3-5

3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon. 5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.

So what is this interpretation of Christ coming on clouds from heaven and every eye seeing Him mean? Who is it given to unseal these meanings according to the text?

Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.

So the Promised One is to unseal the meanings both literal and figurative and be of the tribe of Judah and the root of David. Baha’u’llah was both descendant of David through his father Jesse and from Abraham through His wife Keturah.

As a Christian, I investigated and found Baha’u’llah to be that Lion and the One Who unsealed the books. And so too have many other Christians as well as some priests and clergy. In due time I believe all eyes will see just as all eyes have seen Christ’s spiritual sovereignty after many centuries.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Which religion doesn't? Why would it matter if there were a few outlyers?
...
Why is this an issue?

I merely pointed out that many religions do not deal with the Divine and revelation.
..but the most populous ones i.e. Abrahamic do, yes.

That would be actual deflection. The Quran sounds to hate disbelievers and other religions.

I am suggesting that as the revelation was revealed in a harsh environment i.e. the Arabian desert,
it's style might also be considered "harsh" by those in relative comfort.

1. "Show us the straight path, The path of those whom Thou hast favoured; Not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray." Muslims generally interpret "those whom Allah has favored," "those who earn Allah's anger," and "those who go astray" as Muslims, Jews, and Christians, respectively. 1:6
2. Allah has revealed "clear tokens." Only evil people are disbelievers. 0:0
3. Don't bother warning the disbelievers. Allah has made it impossible for them to believe so that he can torture them forever after they die. 2:6
4. Allah has sickened the hearts of disbelievers and increased their disease. He is a spiritual anti-doctor. 2:10
5. Allah has blinded the disbelievers. "Allah taketh away their light and leaveth them in darkness, where they cannot see, Deaf, dumb and blind." 2:17
6. If you try to compose a surah that is better than those in the Quran, and then fail, Allah will burn you forever in the fire that he has prepared for disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones. 2:24
7. They who disbelieve, and deny Our revelations, such are rightful Peoples of the Fire. They will abide therein." 2:39
8. Allah stamped wretchedness upon the Jews because they killed the prophets and disbelieved Allah's revelations. 2:61
9. Allah turned Sabbath-breaking Jews into apes to be despised and hated. All modern Jews are descendants of apes (or all modern apes are descendants of Sabbath-breaking Jews). 2:65
10. Christians and Jews (who believe in only part of the Scripture), will suffer in this life and go to hell in the next. 2:85
11. "Allah has cursed them for their unbelief." Because I disbelieve in his bull****, Allah has cursed me, along with nearly six billion other non-Muslims. 2:88
12. The curse of Allah is on disbelievers. 2:89
13. "They have incurred anger upon anger. For disbelievers is a shameful doom." 2:90
14. Jews are the greediest of all humankind. They'd like to live 1000 years. But even that "would by no means remove the doom." 2:96
15. Allah is an enemy to the disbelievers. 2:98
16. "For disbelievers is a painful doom." 2:104
17. Don't question anything Muhammed says or choose disbelief over faith. 2:108
18. The Jews and Christians know damn well that the Muslims are right, so they try to make Muslims disbelievers because they envy the truth that they know the Muslims have. 2:109
19. Allah will make disbelievers' lives miserable in this world and torture them forever after they die. 2:114
20. "And thou wilt not be asked about the owners of hell-fire." (They are the non-muslims.) 2:119
21. Disbelievers are losers. 2:121
22. Allah will leave the disbelievers alone for a while, but then he will compel them to the doom of Fire. 2:126

I will not comment on a "flood" of quotes etc.

You also don't experience withdrawal after your brain and nerves are gone. You experience nothing.

Your opinion .. can't be categorically proved either way .. yet suffering is very real to us
in the here and now.

But if you have evidence of hell than demonstrate hell..

see above..

I'm not studying a palimpset to present you with evidence which you will 100% hand wave off..

Ha! If you could find any evidence of ACTUAL change, you would have presented it.
Nobody has done it .. or CAN do it.

I don't care? I don't believe magic books?

Your choice, what to believe and not..

 

[Trailblazer]

I have no idea what this "forrest" lie of argument means? It remains unexplained.

I did explain it in the following posts.

They think that the more they KNOW about a religion the closer they will get to finding the truth about that religion, but what actually happens is that they completely lose sight of the tree (religion) because it gets lost in the forest of trees (details about a religion that don't really matter) ...
Trees, trees, trees everywhere.

Of course they cannot see this since they are lost in the forest. #882

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You cannot see the tree because you are lost in the forest.

You think that the more you KNOW about a religion the closer you will get to finding the truth about that religion, but what actually happens is that you completely lose sight of the tree (religion) because it gets lost in the forest of trees (details about a religion that don't really matter) ...

Maybe you think all that knowledge is going to get you closer to the Truth about God or the Baha'i Faith, but what happens is the exact opposite.
Knowledge can be a veil preventing recognition of Baha’u’llah because people who think they know everything are often haughty and vainglorious. Some of the most pure souls were uneducated. #900

I have no idea why details about the religion wouldn't matter or why knowledge would make one misled? In all cases knowledge is what helps you determine if something is true.

No, too much knowledge causes you to lose sight of the truth about a religion since it leads to mental confusion rather than mental clarity.

Also, if one wants to know if the Baha'i Faith is true, they need to focus on the Baha'i Faith rather than going off in many different directions, studying and talking about other religions that really don't have anything to do with the Baha'i Faith.

For example, if one wants to know if the Baha'i Faith is true, it doesn't matter what the Mormons believe since that is irrelevant as to whether the Baha'i Faith is true.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related to learning and knowledge, I just ran across these passages today:

“… the beloved of God have, in the days of the Manifestation of the Day Star of Truth, been exalted above, and made independent of, all human learning. Nay, from their hearts and the springs of their innate powers hath gushed out unceasingly the inmost essence of human learning and wisdom.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 263-264

“O Náṣir! The excellence of this Day is immensely exalted above the comprehension of men, however extensive their knowledge, however profound their understanding. How much more must it transcend the imaginations of them that have strayed from its light, and been shut out from its glory! Shouldst thou rend asunder the grievous veil that blindeth thy vision, thou wouldst behold such a bounty as naught, from the beginning that hath no beginning till the end that hath no end, can either resemble or equal.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 108

 

[CG Didymus]

As you probably know we cannot know God directly. So what is meant by ‘knowing God’ is meant His Manifestations Who are God’s Representatives on earth.

How would I "know" that? That is a Baha'i belief. And that is a major problem that some people have with Baha'is. And it is similar to the problem that some people have with any religion that believes that God only communicates to certain individuals who then tell everybody else what God expects of us and who God is. Are any of these individuals consistent with each other?

There is small to great variation between what these individuals say. People with beliefs like the born-again Christians simply say that most of those other individuals were false prophets. They do accept those from the Jewish religion, but they negate several things taught in Judaism and say those things have been replaced with new teachings from God.

A religion like the Baha'i Faith does that with all the other major religions. They say that those old teachings have been replaced by newer ones from their prophet. But not with everything... some teachings and beliefs, the ones I usually mention are reincarnation as believed by some Hindus, and the physical resurrection as believed by many Christians, these are done away with and discarded as being wrong beliefs based on misinterpretations of the Scriptures from those religions.

Either way, calling a religion false or saying it's been replaced by the new teachings of the new religion, the old religions are made irrelevant.

 

[CG Didymus]

You've studied so much, and learned so little. How is that possible?

From this TB came up with the "forest and the trees" thing. It doesn't fit the Baha'i Faith very well. They want people to study and research their religion and, by doing so, "find" the truth.

Then you make silly comments, that we cannot "see". See what? I can see, I have articulated several lines of issues that you ignore.
A man is running a con.

I don't know if Baha'is call Joseph Smith a con, but I think they do call Mirza Ghulam Ahmad a con. And both of their religious movements have more followers than the Baha'is. So, if one or both those religious groups is false, then it would have been a good thing if the people would have looked into the religion and the claims of the prophet a little deeper.

But, for Baha'is, they would probably like people in all the other religions to go deeper into their Scriptures and then to go deeper into the Baha'i writing and again, hopefully see that the Baha'i Faith is true.

You have already USED THIS METAPHOR, and it didn't say anything. So I explained the issues and asked you to explain (without the already used metaphor) exactly what I am not seeing?

The problem with some of us, we did go deeper and do some research, but we came up with the wrong conclusion... we didn't find the Baha'i Faith to be the truth. How do Baha'is, Christians and other "true" believers in other religions explain that? We're blind? We're lost? We can't see the forest through the trees?

For them, it's got to be us, because they know it can't be them.... They "know" they are right and have the truth. And yet again, they all believe something different.