Can we change our mind about what we believe?

[joelr]

The Baha'i Faith did not make anything up. Baha'u'llah wrote what He wrote and we believe it since we believe He is a Messenger/Manifestation of God, so He knows more about Noah and Abraham and Jesus than the men who wrote the Bible.

You say your book is dictated from God, Jewish people say that was dictated from God.
In real life Noah is a re-make of Mesopotamian flood narratives and Abraham is a literary construct. Gospel Jesus is a Greek savior demigod.

Holy moly! The most important event in the life of Jesus was not his resurrection! The main reason the resurrection is important to Christians is because they 'believe' Jesus' resurrection means that they will also resurrect and have a body like they believe Jesus had. A complete misinterpretation of Bible verses led to this false Christian doctrine. The other reason the resurrection is important to Christians is because they use it to claim superiority over all the other religions.

The most important 'event' in the life of Jesus was His death on the cross, but the most important thing Jesus did for humanity was give us His teachings.

Nothing Jesus said was new. Rabbi Hillel was teaching the same before Jesus.

Similarities to the Golden Rule​

Love of peace​

Obligations to self and others​

Hillel the Elder - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Baha'is believe those other Messengers were sent by God, but but that the Scriptures were misinterpreted, and the religions were corrupted by man over time, but I have already said this about 100 times.

He's probably saying that because that is what Islam says and he sticks close to Islamic theology.

Baha'is believe that the most important part of a religion is the spiritual teachings.
In the following passage, the Law of God refers to the divinely revealed religion of God. The spiritual message (spiritual virtues and divine qualities) are the same in all the great world religions. The spiritual teachings are the essence, or essential element, of a religion, and those teachings were not lost. They have been recorded and preserved in all the Holy Books.

“the Law of God is divided into two parts. One is the fundamental basis which comprises all spiritual things—that is to say, it refers to the spiritual virtues and divine qualities; this does not change nor alter: it is the Holy of Holies, which is the essence of the Law of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá’u’lláh, and which lasts and is established in all the prophetic cycles. It will never be abrogated, for it is spiritual and not material truth; it is faith, knowledge, certitude, justice, piety, righteousness, trustworthiness, love of God, benevolence, purity, detachment, humility, meekness, patience and constancy. It shows mercy to the poor, defends the oppressed, gives to the wretched and uplifts the fallen......

None of those teachings are spiritual. They are ethics and morals people came up with. The Hindu teachings also contain them. They are in Greek philosophy. Sometimes credit is given to Zeus for them. Is Zeus real now as well?

Or Gods:

Marcus Aurelius


The Meditations


From Diognetus, not to busy myself about trifling things, and not to give credit to what was said by miracle-workers and jugglers about incantations and the driving away of daemons and such things;



From my brother Severus, to love my kin, and to love truth, and to love justice; and through him I learned to know Thrasea, Helvidius, Cato, Dion, Brutus; and from him I received the idea of a polity in which there is the same law for all, a polity administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed; I learned from him also consistency and undeviating steadiness in my regard for philosophy; and a disposition to do good, and to give to others readily, and to cherish good hopes, and to believe that I am loved by my friends; and in him I observed no concealment of his opinions with respect to those whom he condemned, and that his friends had no need to conjecture what he wished or did not wish, but it was quite plain.


From Maximus…..He was accustomed to do acts of beneficence, and was ready to forgive, and was free from all falsehood;



For it is according to nature, and nothing is evil which is according to nature.

These divine qualities, these eternal commandments, will never be abolished; nay, they will last and remain established for ever and ever. These virtues of humanity will be renewed in each of the different cycles; for at the end of every cycle the spiritual Law of God—that is to say, the human virtues—disappears, and only the form subsists.
Some Answered Questions, pp. 47-48

From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet.

...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bible

Nothing that hasn;t been said by Epictetus or

Marcus Aurelius or many others who have not claimed they were channeling a deity.


But now see, here you say he is revealing information, that the Bible text is not wholly authentic. Yet he doesn't give one single historical fact that wasn't known at the time but is now known. He could have said Isaiah was written by 3 authors or Daniel is a forgery or many many things that were later learned.
such as -

"The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis. Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.

Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer, translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible. "


So he is revealing information but keeping it vague, as a man would do who was trying to pass his work off as revelations, he's trying to sound like he's giving insights people couldn't possibly know, but he won't say exactly what. This is suspicious, again!

 

[Trailblazer]

The Book of Revelation? That book is very specific about events. A 7 headed dragon, stars falling, fire, all sorts of crazy stuff and monsters show up and wreak havok. Is all that being ignored?

It is not being ignored, but it is not being interpreted literally. Much of the Book of Revelation is figurative, not literal. In other words, there is no actual 7 headed dragon or monsters. That represents something else.

The 2nd coming is the end of the world. I haven't gotten that deep into the apologetics they must have to explain away all these things.

The second coming was never intended to be the end of the world. Matthew 24:3 means means the end of an age.
That Bible was mistranslated so the translation has been corrected.

KJ21
And as He sat upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Thy coming and of the end of the world?”
NKJV
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

NIV
As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”
NIVUK
As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. ‘Tell us,’ they said, ‘when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?’

The end of the age is the end of the old age and the beginning of a new age. Baha'is believe the new age was ushered in by the Bab and Baha'u'llah, and that Baha'u'llah was the second coming, the return of Christ.

Matthew 24:3 As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” 4 And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray. 5 For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray.

Please note that Jesus did not answer that He was coming back to earth, since Jesus never planned to return to earth. (John 14:19, John 17:11, John 17:4)
Jesus only warned people not being led astray since He knew that many would come claiming to be Christ and lead people astray.

 

[Trailblazer]

You say your book is dictated from God, Jewish people say that was dictated from God.

Jewish people can say anything they want to say, but the fact remains that the Old Testament was written by men, and it has many authors.
It was not written by any of the prophets or by Moses. People can say it was divinely inspired but that is a real stretch.

The only Scriptures that were written by a Messenger of God are the Writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

The claim of fulfilment can lead to unexpected conclusions. For example, verse 25 from John 15 leads to Psalms 35, 69, and 109. Psalm 35 relates to verse 26.

But [this cometh to pass], that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
John 15:25-26

Psalm 69 and 109 are also about fulfilment described by Acts 1:20.

Men [and] brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
Acts 1:16

For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.
Acts 1:20

I am no expert on the Bible but I do not see how any of these verses in Psalms or Acts 1 are about the return of Christ, which is the fulfillment of prophecy.
However, I believe that John 15:26 is about the return of Christ, who was the Comforter and the Spirit of Truth, who I believe was Baha'u'llah.

Jesus promised to send the Comforter and the Spirit of truth and Jesus said what he would do when he came.

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:13-14 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.​

One of the various proofs that Baha’u’llah was the Comforter and the Spirit of truth is that Baha’u’llah did EXACTLY what Jesus said the Comforter and Spirit of truth would do. Referring to Jesus as the Son of Man, Baha’u’llah testified of Jesus and glorified Jesus.

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.

We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86​

 

[Ebionite]

I am no expert on the Bible but I do not see how any of these verses in Psalms or Acts 1 are about the return of Christ, which is the fulfillment of prophecy.

They're not, they're about healing the wound. There's a lot of prophecy which isn't about the return.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is absurd that you would enter this as evidence.

I did not present this as evidence. I was simply refuting what you said: "With Baha'i, there are no miracles and things of this sort."
There were miracles in the Baha'i Faith: Famous Miracles in the Baha’i Faith

So you admit he read Islamic and Christian scriptures but then claim he got knowledge from God? What is your evidence? We already have a reason for him to have this knowledge so adding God onto it isn't needed. That isn't proof, it's a claim. Also made by Mormons, JW, Islam, Hindu, and should not be believed without reasonable evidence.

It is a claim that Bahaullah made:

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon Mycouch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.”​

Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57​

Most of what Baha'u'llah wrote is not in the Bible or the Qur'an. For those who think logically, that is a dead giveaway that what Baha'u'llah wrote did not come from the Bible or the Qur'an (except in a few cases where he cites those texts). If some of His Writings sound similar to the Bible or the Qur'an, that is because they came from the same God. The spiritual teachings do not change over time, but they are renewed in every age.

In the Preamble to the Hidden Words, Baha'ullah wrote:

This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We have taken the inner essence thereof and clothed it in the garment of brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and in the realm of spirit obtain the gem of Divine virtue.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 3

You haven't demonstrated any God or that the universe was created? This is another base claim with no evidence. When you believe claim after claim you probably don't care about what is actually true.

God is called the Creator because without God there would be no creation, but God did not create the creation. Rather, the creation has always existed.

“As to thy question concerning the origin of creation. Know assuredly that God’s creation hath existed from eternity, and will continue to exist forever. Its beginning hath had no beginning, and its end knoweth no end. His name, the Creator, presupposeth a creation, even as His title, the Lord of Men, must involve the existence of a servant.”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 150​

​

“God was, and His creation had ever existed beneath His shelter from the beginning that hath no beginning, apart from its being preceded by a Firstness which cannot be regarded as firstness and originated by a Cause inscrutable even unto all men of learning.”​

Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140​

Oh, I understand. So God just "choose" to leave behind only knowledge that humans already knew, nothing new. That's convenient. So another explanation here is that this is just written by a man and no God is involved.

That is not what I said or meant.
I said: "whatever you see is what you get, and that is what God wanted to do."

Humans did not already know what God revealed, not before God revealed it.

No. The other option is that this man wrote some books and claimed a God was sending him messages, but it's not true. It has nothing to do with a God existing or not. I don't know where you got into this black and white thinking?

Again, "Logically, what we see is what God chose to do, if God exists, so the other option you can choose is that God does not exist."
God either exists or does not exist. That is black and white.

Why did you deflect from what I said and start talking about Messengers?
This is not about Messengers. Whether or not Messengers of God exist, what we see is what we get.

It is possible that a man wrote some books and claimed a God was sending him messages, but it's not true.
It is possible that a man wrote some books and claimed a God was sending him messages, but it's true.
Nobody can prove that or disprove it.

God has not. In the OT Yahweh shows up many many times, Satan shows up, does supernatural things, Jesus does many miracles, Yahweh even fights a sea monster. Among many other things. Faith is a bad path to truth, you can take faith in any position regardless of its truth. Faith is used when there is no evidence

In order to believe what it says in the OT --- Yahweh shows up many many times, Satan shows up, does supernatural things, Jesus does many miracles, Yahweh even fights a sea monster. Among many other things --- you have to have faith, since there is no proof that what the OT says is true, not any more than there is any proof that what Baha'u'llah said is true. As such, it is all about what you choose to believe, the Bible or Baha'u'llah.

God has always required that we have faith in order to believe, but God has also provided evidence so that faith is not blind.

I still haven't seen any evidence you speak of?

Yet I have presented it numerous times on this forum.

Strawman. No critical thinker here has ever said they know everything. In fact all they usually ask for is basic reasonable evidence.

Fair enough, but when we give them the evidence they say "that's not evidence."

What truth? You can never show any truth? The science he predicted was wrong. The prophecies are as vague as every other religion. The work has no evidence, it's just a man writing about God. That is not evidence. We are arguing against the lack of evidence you have and the level of unwarranted belief.
Maybe if you had questioned it rationally you would have had similar questions?

Again, Baha'u'llah did not predict anything to do with science.
Some prophecies are vague, others are specific.

No, a man writing about God is not evidence but I never claimed it was evidence. The Writings of Bahaullah in their entirety is part of the evidence, but not the post important part.

What would be the evidence if a man was a Messenger of God? In other words, how would we know He was a Messenger of God? Quite some time ago I stated a thread asking that question, since nobody likes the evidence I present.

What evidence?

The Messengers of God are the evidence that God exists.

That is a claim. The new Jesus in Au., he has a following. Mormons have a messenger and a new Bible, it isn't about recognizing a messenger of God. It's about demonstrating you actually are a messenger of God.

As I have already said numerous times, the claim to be a Messenger of God cannot be demonstrated. Any logical person would immediately realize why.

HE did not. Science, wrong, philosophy, none, anything new that a human would not know, nothing. Beyond that it's just wishful thinking.
I don't want to live by wishful thinking.

Baha'u'llah did not get science wrong since He did not write about science.
Baha'u'llah wrote about many things a human could not know.

You quote Matthwew but you ignore the part that says all new messengers are fake. Cherry Pick.

There is no part of Matthew that says part that says all new messengers are fake.

Matthew 7:15-20 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.​

Fruits: the pleasant or successful result of work or actions: fruit

Again, using logic, why would Jesus say "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" if there were not going to be any true prophets?

It isn't. A God would be able to demonstrate he is a God, as the OT, NT and Mormon Bible know.

Why did you change the subject again? I was talking about the narrow gate. Behind the narrow gate is the new Messenger of God. Few people find the narrow gate and even fewer people enter through it because it is narrow, so it is difficult to get through.

It does not matter if God would be able to demonstrate He is a God. God does not demonstrate that He is God.
Books that say that God demonstrated that He is God are just books written by men. They are not proof of anything.

If you believe that God demonstrated he is God in the OT, NT and Mormon Bible, why don't YOU believe God exists?

What I am doing is thinking for myself. Not following any crowd.

That's good.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are making narratives to justify why this person clearly has zero evidence. I believe you want this to be a message from God and are attempting to make justifications so it can be true. I am not interested in doing that.

You can believe whatever you want to believe but you do not know why I believe. Only I now why.
I believe because of what I see as evidence that supports the claims. It is as simple as that. It is not about what I want, it is about what I see.

No, you should not believe because you want to believe and then try to find justifications for your belief. You should only believe because you see evidence.

If it were God, he would know how serious Muslims are and how serious Christians are and when a man writes some books and makes these claims he would NEED to have MASSIVE evidence. In fact angels would show up, he would be given supernatural powers and he would be given knowledge that no person could deny, could only be from a God or advanced alien.

The obvious problem is that you cannot speak for what God would do because you are not God.
Only you see it that way, but others would not think

What you want -- angels would show up, he would be given supernatural powers and he would be given knowledge that no person could deny -- is not going to happen since God does not want to make it so easy to recognize His Messenger in which case we would not need to use our free will to choose.

We only see the human characteristics of the Messenger, not their divine power, and the reason for that is explained below.

"... While the Manifestations of God all shine with the splendours of God's Revelation, they can reveal themselves in only two ways. The first is to appear in their naked glory. Should this happen, all human beings would witness their awesome power, would bow before their majesty and would submit their will entirely to God's Viceregent on earth. People would thus become puppets of God and lose their free will; all would follow the path of truth, not by their own volition but by capitulating to the irresistible power of the Manifestation of God………​

​

The only other way that the Manifestations of God can reveal themselves, which ensures the preservation of human free will, is to conceal their divine power behind the veil of human characteristics. Although they possess majestic, divine qualities, it is, according to Bahá’u’lláh, against the law of God for them to reveal these to the generality of mankind. Through this method people can exercise their free will to accept or to reject the Message of God, to live in accordance with His teachings or to disobey Him."​

​

Adib Taherzadeh, The Child of the Covenant, p. 17​

Leaving it up in the air without evidence suggests it's just another man making a claim of revelation but he cannot show evidence because he's just a man. God would know NO religious Muslim or otherwise would ever leave their religion for books with no evidence, not even written as well in a literary sense, no advanced philosophy, nothing.

Of course God knows that no religious Muslim or other religious person would ever leave their religion, but not because there is no evidence for the Baha'i Faith. After all, those older religions have nothing that the Baha'i Faith does not have. All they have are books with claims.

So you actually think Christian theologians are wRONG, because Bahai says "oh no, what this means is......." and he goes on to make it mean his religion is correct. Of course he does. You cannot see how devious hat is and would never convert a religious person

Yes, I think they are wrong because I have evidence that indicates that the Baha'i Faith is right.

And mysteriously, no supernatural events recorded, no angels this time? It's so suspicious.

There is nothing suspicious about that. Humans don't need that kind of thing that was in the Bible anymore, as they have evolved beyond that point.

Like you , they believe their scripture. You, believe your books. Neither have proof. All are likely made up by people, no Gods anywhere to be found.

That's true, we all have scriptures we believe and none of us have proof.

Again, Jesus returns, all of these conditions are supposed to happen, end of the world. So now you have to claim that is all wrong,

If Jesus returned and all these conditions happened I could not claim it was wrong. But that is never going to happen.

it's just going to be a guy, no miracles, no supernatural events, no angels, no Yahweh. No chance.

Yes, that is what happened.

They say we are not animals.
https://bahaiteachings.org/brand-new-religious-principles-bahai-faith

Where does it say that? The Baha'i Faith teaches that we are human animals who have a soul, which is what distinguishes us from other animals.https://bahaiteachings.org/brand-ne...114010601&mc_cid=8eb5f548de&mc_eid=4e2cd3f474

There is not. No medium has EVER shown evidence. They claim to make contact. I repeatedly ask anyone who can contact any spirit to read a card I have with a 14 digit number and tell it to them. It never happens. To anyone. Those people are probably all fraud.

That is not the way you can know if the medium made contact. the only way you could know is if something came through the medium that only you and the departed spirit know. The medium should never be told this piece of information. The medium is only a mediator between the spirit world and this world.

 

[Trailblazer]

Please, right now, give me a link to that information.

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh is the book that I would recommend.

Below are some excerpts from the Introduction to Gleanings (which is not in the online version, only in the book):

“Gleanings is excerpts from various Tablets. In the introduction to Gleanings it explains how it is organized into five parts. Part one, pages 1-46, proclaims this as the “Day of God.” Part two, pages 46-136, concerns the Manifestation of God and His significance. Part three, pages 136-200, deals with basic questions concerning the soul and its immortality. Part four, pages 200-259, concerns the spiritual aspects of the World Order and the Most Great Peace. Part five, pages 259-346, deals with the duties of the individual and the spiritual meaning of life.”

I do not buy that you "recognized" his messenger, I suspect you want this to be true and accept it.

The last thing on earth I want is for this to be true. My late husband knew that only too well since we had many late night discussions that ended in him asking me why I don't become an atheist.

 

[CG Didymus]

You say your book is dictated from God, Jewish people say that was dictated from God.
In real life Noah is a re-make of Mesopotamian flood narratives and Abraham is a literary construct. Gospel Jesus is a Greek savior demigod.

Hmmm? The Baha'is say that God sent many messengers/manifestations, but he didn't have them write down their teachings? What was God thinking?

Lucky for us that God sent a man, who took the title "Baha'u'llah, The Glory of God" to tell us what the true message of Krishna, Buddha, Jesus and all the rest really was.

I wonder why it took God so long to figure that out? Or... It's just been people making up things all along.

 

[CG Didymus]

And mysteriously, no supernatural events recorded, no angels this time? It's so suspicious.

Baha'is have their "supernatural" stuff too. There's been Baha'is who claim to have had visions or dreams where Abdul Baha' came to them.

One Baha'i travel teacher said that she was been driven out into the desert to go tell some Native people about the Baha'i Faith, but a flash flood had carved out a big chuck of the dirt road. She told the driver to back up and floor it.

A Baha'i posted something about a comet that appeared and tied it into being a "sign" for the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Then a Baha'i wrote a book saying that an earthquake in Portugal, and a "dark" smoky day and a meteor shower in North America were all "signs" that were predicted in Revelation.

But the greatest miracle is how the Baha'i teaching have brought all the people, the world over, together in peace and unity. Wait... What was that? That hasn't happened and doesn't look very close to happening. Okay, well that miracle is on hold for now. But someday.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Book of Revelation? That book is very specific about events. A 7 headed dragon, stars falling, fire, all sorts of crazy stuff and monsters show up and wreak havok. Is all that being ignored? The 2nd coming is the end of the world. I haven't gotten that deep into the apologetics they must have to explain away all these things.

"Some Answered Questions" by Abdul Baha has a few interpretations of a couple of chapters of Revelation. "Thief in the Night" by Bill Sears and there is some other book by some Baha'i.

The earthquake in Portugal and the dark day and meteor shower are from "A Thief in the Night". It might be "Some Answered Questions" that has Muhammad and Ali being the "two witnesses" and the "three wows" being Muhammed, the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

I think it's all too far-fetched. But it works for Baha'is.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Yes, when a person learns more.

And they also have to be interested in what is accurate, as opposed to what confirms their bias.

For example, atheists love to support evolution because it strengthens their claims of natural methods. No God needed, they think.

But in general, they ignore what posters here, have said about their experiences with invisible entities, or having conversations with supernatural beings.

Atheists prefer, ie., want, to think these posters are “mistaken”, or maybe mentally unbalanced.

A few might be, but not all!

Atheists would rather not consider the implications.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Not everyone will ever view the evidence the same way…

It will happen, when ‘God’s Kingdom comes’, and His “will” will “be done on Earth.” — Matthew 6:9,10

And what is His will? 1 Timothy 2:4 tells us, …”whose Will is that all sorts of people should be saved and come to an accurate knowledge of the truth.”

That time is coming… it’s not too far into the future.

Take care.

 

[joelr]

It is not being ignored, but it is not being interpreted literally. Much of the Book of Revelation is figurative, not literal. In other words, there is no actual 7 headed dragon or monsters. That represents something else.

Revelation is not about the future.

The second coming was never intended to be the end of the world. Matthew 24:3 means means the end of an age.
That Bible was mistranslated so the translation has been corrected.

End of an Age in Jewish terms meant the end of the world when a messiah comes. Bahai people clearly didn't have the luxury of Rabbi to tell him what the translations actually meant in proper context.

Please note that Jesus did not answer that He was coming back to earth, since Jesus never planned to return to earth. (John 14:19,

He was saying this before the resurrectiuon. He meant he will. live in spirit and his disciples will know it. Who gave you these misinterpretations? Is 18th century Bahai trying to re-interpret Jewish meaning of their stories?

John 17:11, John 17:4)
Jesus only warned people not being led astray since He knew that many would come claiming to be Christ and lead people astray.

17:4 means the work on earth is at an end until the end times. When someone claims to be re-writing the Bible in 1800, you should be skeptical.

 

[joelr]

Jewish people can say anything they want to say, but the fact remains that the Old Testament was written by men, and it has many authors.
It was not written by any of the prophets or by Moses. People can say it was divinely inspired but that is a real stretch.

The only Scriptures that were written by a Messenger of God are the Writings of the Bab and Baha'u'llah.

BAhai can say anything they want to say, but the books were written by a man. Saying a bunch of incorrect science, vague prophecy, zero evidence, predictions, science, philosophy, ZERO, is a huge stretch.

Book after book of endless praise God speeches and everyone get along. At least the NT was written by actual trained writers and the text can be broken down and shown to use many high level literary devices and creative use of older stories. As well as a brilliant combination of Judaism, Hellenism and Persian myth.

 

[joelr]

I did not present this as evidence. I was simply refuting what you said: "With Baha'i, there are no miracles and things of this sort."
There were miracles in the Baha'i Faith: Famous Miracles in the Baha’i Faith

Uh, you didn't refute it, you just presented it again, as evidence of miracles. It's no different than the scriptures, anecdotal stories. In one he predicts sea travel would get safer. Wow, what a prediction? What a miracle?



https://bahai-library.com/gammage_famous_miracles

It is a claim that Bahaullah made:

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon Mycouch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.”​

Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57​

Yes, it's a claim. He gained God-understanding, yet he still gets all science wrong, knows no information about any subject more than what was known at the time. And still isn't a great writer but a space filler.





http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/PB/pb-12.html.utf8?query=couch&action=highlight#gr1

Most of what Baha'u'llah wrote is not in the Bible or the Qur'an. For those who think logically, that is a dead giveaway that what Baha'u'llah wrote did not come from the Bible or the Qur'an (except in a few cases where he cites those texts). If some of His Writings sound similar to the Bible or the Qur'an, that is because they came from the same God. The spiritual teachings do not change over time, but they are renewed in every age.

I never said he ripped verse off. He is a human author and he sounds like it. "Lo for almighty God is the most supreme and high being, LO, we must move in his divine grace and follow his majestic wisdom......."
Human, man, writing about God, making false claims.

In the Preamble to the Hidden Words, Baha'ullah wrote:

This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We have taken the inner essence thereof and clothed it in the garment of brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and in the realm of spirit obtain the gem of Divine virtue.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 3

Yup, that is Preamble alright.
-realm of glory
- tongue of power and might
-garment of brevity
-token of grace
-gem of Divine virtue

well he does understand metaphor, a bit too much. Any God that spoke like that needs an editor. Or a "divine editor of glory"



http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/HW/hw-1.html

God is called the Creator because without God there would be no creation, but God did not create the creation. Rather, the creation has always existed.

“As to thy question concerning the origin of creation. Know assuredly that God’s creation hath existed from eternity, and will continue to exist forever. Its beginning hath had no beginning, and its end knoweth no end. His name, the Creator, presupposeth a creation, even as His title, the Lord of Men, must involve the existence of a servant.”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 150​

​

“God was, and His creation had ever existed beneath His shelter from the beginning that hath no beginning, apart from its being preceded by a Firstness which cannot be regarded as firstness and originated by a Cause inscrutable even unto all men of learning.”​

Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140​

And he was writing before we knew about the big bang so he got that wrong.
I'm not interested in a sermon by a strange writer, do you have evidence he speaks to a God? I already know he writes too many words. I don't buy what he is selling because I don't believe things without proper evidence.


And you are posting this IN RESPONSE to me saying you haven't demonstrated the universe was created or even that a God exists?
Your response is to post poetry from some guy? (hint, that isn't proof)


http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/b/TB/tb-10.html#pg140

That is not what I said or meant.
I said: "whatever you see is what you get, and that is what God wanted to do."

Humans did not already know what God revealed, not before God revealed it.

Right, so even though we now have Christians and Muslims and Hindu, who all believe their scripture which is clear that their deities did many miracles, shut out the sun, rose people from the dead, destroyed entire cities, and so on......this time we get a bunch of writing. No supernatural powers, fights with sea monsters, mass healings, defeats of death, nothing. And an all-powerful God is supposed to think that thats a good idea and will convince all the religious people to convert?

Again, "Logically, what we see is what God chose to do, if God exists, so the other option you can choose is that God does not exist."
God either exists or does not exist. That is black and white.

Yeah but that isn't the only option. The most likely option is, it's a claim, it's not messages from God just because he "says so". This isn't "what God chose", it's a false claim.

Why did you deflect from what I said and start talking about Messengers?
This is not about Messengers. Whether or not Messengers of God exist, what we see is what we get.

It is possible that a man wrote some books and claimed a God was sending him messages, but it's not true.
It is possible that a man wrote some books and claimed a God was sending him messages, but it's true.
Nobody can prove that or disprove it.

Nobody can disprove the 2nd coming of Jesus in AU, right now. However, just like Bahai, he has no evidence. Nothing. Which means it's likely false. Like most of these claims, probably all of them. You can believe what you like, I choose to believe things proportional to the evidence.

 

[joelr]

I did not present this as evidence. I was simply refuting what you said: "With Baha'i, there are no miracles and things of this sort."
There were miracles in the Baha'i Faith: Famous Miracles in the Baha’i Faith

Uh, you didn't refute it, you just presented it again, as evidence of miracles. It's no different than the scriptures, anecdotal stories. In one he predicts sea travel would get safer. Wow, what a prediction? What a miracle?



Famous Miracles in the Bahá'í Faith

It is a claim that Bahaullah made:

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon Mycouch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.”​

Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57​

Yes, it's a claim. He gained God-understanding, yet he still gets all science wrong, knows no information about any subject more than what was known at the time. And still isn't a great writer but a space filler.





Bahá'í Reference Library - Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 57-60

Most of what Baha'u'llah wrote is not in the Bible or the Qur'an. For those who think logically, that is a dead giveaway that what Baha'u'llah wrote did not come from the Bible or the Qur'an (except in a few cases where he cites those texts). If some of His Writings sound similar to the Bible or the Qur'an, that is because they came from the same God. The spiritual teachings do not change over time, but they are renewed in every age.

I never said he ripped verse off. He is a human author and he sounds like it. "Lo for almighty God is the most supreme and high being, LO, we must move in his divine grace and follow his majestic wisdom......."
Human, man, writing about God, making false claims.

In the Preamble to the Hidden Words, Baha'ullah wrote:

This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We have taken the inner essence thereof and clothed it in the garment of brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and in the realm of spirit obtain the gem of Divine virtue.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 3

Yup, that is Preamble alright.
-realm of glory
- tongue of power and might
-garment of brevity
-token of grace
-gem of Divine virtue

well he does understand metaphor, a bit too much. Any God that spoke like that needs an editor. Or a "divine editor of glory"



Bahá'í Reference Library - The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, Page 3

God is called the Creator because without God there would be no creation, but God did not create the creation. Rather, the creation has always existed.

“As to thy question concerning the origin of creation. Know assuredly that God’s creation hath existed from eternity, and will continue to exist forever. Its beginning hath had no beginning, and its end knoweth no end. His name, the Creator, presupposeth a creation, even as His title, the Lord of Men, must involve the existence of a servant.”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 150​

​

“God was, and His creation had ever existed beneath His shelter from the beginning that hath no beginning, apart from its being preceded by a Firstness which cannot be regarded as firstness and originated by a Cause inscrutable even unto all men of learning.”​

Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140​

And he was writing before we knew about the big bang so he got that wrong.
I'm not interested in a sermon by a strange writer, do you have evidence he speaks to a God? I already know he writes too many words. I don't buy what he is selling because I don't believe things without proper evidence.





Bahá'í Reference Library - Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh Revealed After the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Pages 137-152

In order to believe what it says in the OT --- Yahweh shows up many many times, Satan shows up, does supernatural things, Jesus does many miracles, Yahweh even fights a sea monster. Among many other things --- you have to have faith, since there is no proof that what the OT says is true, not any more than there is any proof that what Baha'u'llah said is true. As such, it is all about what you choose to believe, the Bible or Baha'u'llah.

God has always required that we have faith in order to believe, but God has also provided evidence so that faith is not blind.

Faith is not a good path to truth. The Nazis has faith, KKK has faith, any group with any ideology can claim just have faith.


No. Evidence is needed or people will continue to believe false things. Wait until the next "messenger" happens to attract people and they have a more violent message. People need critical thinking, not wishful thinking.

God has not provided evidence. I already responded to this, all you did was re-post it, rather than provide evidence.

Yet I have presented it numerous times on this forum.

You haven't shown any good evidence. Words from a man is not evidence. "A book says so" is not good evidence.


Anecdotal B.S. all added up is still B.S.

Fair enough, but when we give them the evidence they say "that's not evidence."

Because it isn't good evidence. In fact, the same type of evidence is used in Christianity and Islam and not only do you ignore it you feel justified in saying they are wrong and they mis-interpreted their evidence.


If it was good evidence you could not do that. Your weak evidence can also be overturned by another person who gains a following and says "God changed his mind, this group is the leaders of the world, God wants us to be the rulers....." and they will also have weak vague prophecies, long winded words that sound fancy, claims of healings but no medical reports, all the same nonsense.


It isn't evidence. It's a person making a claim. He claims some Christian scripture is misinterpreted to fit his message. Christians can just claim the original scripture is actually correct, Jesus tells them in their heart.


Blah blah.....


This is why you need real evidence. In religion their is not evidence because it's all man made stories.

Again, Baha'u'llah did not predict anything to do with science.
Some prophecies are vague, others are specific.

HE did, he has a chapter on evolution and in another book they talked about the ether, cells, humans are not animals, I posted on it years ago.


Last post I posted some quotes on Bahai science and how it's wrong.






If you are ignoring it you are just using confirmation bias to ignore things that show this isn't real.


I can find the science if I try. I already debunked it though.

There are no prophecies.



A prophecy would say something specific. Not a war is coming when political tensions are running high. Or a vague prediction about any war which will eventually fit something.


HE didn't predict nuclear power. A God would make it clear. He could give the equation. Explain light, the 4 forces, anything.

No, a man writing about God is not evidence but I never claimed it was evidence. The Writings of Bahaullah in their entirety is part of the evidence, but not the post important part.

Writing words is not evidence unless it says things that a human could not possibly know. Saying humans are not animals, garment of brevity and praise God, is not evidence.

What would be the evidence if a man was a Messenger of God? In other words, how would we know He was a Messenger of God? Quite some time ago I stated a thread asking that question, since nobody likes the evidence I present.

The Messengers of God are the evidence that God exists.

Now that would be circular. A man claims to be a messenger, and he doesn't need evidence because he is the evidence.


You would not buy that from any other religion.

As I have already said numerous times, the claim to be a Messenger of God cannot be demonstrated. Any logical person would immediately realize why.

Baha'u'llah did not get science wrong since He did not write about science.
Baha'u'llah wrote about many things a human could not know.

"1KNOW THAT IT is one of the most abstruse questions of divinity that the world of existence—that is, this endless universe—has no beginning."

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

this book and another have incorrect science.


Why is it you have NEVER been able to show something written a human could not know?

There is no part of Matthew that says part that says all new messengers are fake.

Matthew 7:15-20 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.​

Fruits: the pleasant or successful result of work or actions: fruit

Again, using logic, why would Jesus say "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" if there were not going to be any true prophets?

Well that's interesting because the 2nd coming of Jesus in AU seems to have good "fruit"? Huh? Guess he's really Jesus?






The Messiah: meet the Australian man who says he's Jesus and his followers | 7NEWS Spotlight

If you really want to use logic, how about this:


A man writing long winded praise and claiming to be a messenger of God with literally NO PROOF is not actually a God messenger.


Just like Jesus in AU

 

[joelr]

There is no part of Matthew that says part that says all new messengers are fake.

Matthew 7:15-20 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.​

Fruits: the pleasant or successful result of work or actions: fruit

Again, using logic, why would Jesus say "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" if there were not going to be any true prophets?

Well that's interesting because the 2nd coming of Jesus in AU seems to have good "fruit"? Huh? Guess he's really Jesus?






The Messiah: meet the Australian man who says he's Jesus and his followers | 7NEWS Spotlight

If you really want to use logic, how about this:


A man writing long winded praise and claiming to be a messenger of God with literally NO PROOF is not actually a God messenger.




Just like Jesus in AU.

Why did you change the subject again? I was talking about the narrow gate. Behind the narrow gate is the new Messenger of God. Few people find the narrow gate and even fewer people enter through it because it is narrow, so it is difficult to get through.

Sorry, Hillel was teaching this before Jesus and so was most Greek philosophy. Because Bahai found the narrow gate metaphor doesn't make him a speaker from God.


Living good ethics and belief in obvious fiction are 2 completely different things.

It does not matter if God would be able to demonstrate He is a God. God does not demonstrate that He is God.

Uh, according to the only information that is supposedly about a God. he does. She does.






Inanna, Yahweh, Zeus, Allah, all demonstrate they are Gods.

Books that say that God demonstrated that He is God are just books written by men. They are not proof of anything.

The most ironic thing ever said, by anyone.


He thinks the ether is real, the universe is eternal and humans are not animals, yet his writings trump all religious scripture ever.




Bummer how easily fooled people can be.

If you believe that God demonstrated he is God in the OT, NT and Mormon Bible, why don't YOU believe God exists?

Those are stories, but Bahai believes they are real. Or does he believe ALL of the actual appearances of Yahweh are fake in order to justify the fact that he knows no Gods will be showing up during his time.




So many red flags here it's insane.

 

[joelr]

You can believe whatever you want to believe but you do not know why I believe. Only I now why.
I believe because of what I see as evidence that supports the claims. It is as simple as that. It is not about what I want, it is about what I see.

Again, I have seen no evidence to believe these stories are what they claim and I see many actual mistakes about science and the Bible.

No, you should not believe because you want to believe and then try to find justifications for your belief. You should only believe because you see evidence.

I think you have been fooled by sub-par evidence.

The obvious problem is that you cannot speak for what God would do because you are not God.
Only you see it that way, but others would not think

What you want -- angels would show up, he would be given supernatural powers and he would be given knowledge that no person could deny -- is not going to happen since God does not want to make it so easy to recognize His Messenger in which case we would not need to use our free will to choose.

No, that doesn't make sense. Use our free will? To be fooled by what looks like a con-man? No Muslims are converting, no Christains are converting on any type of mass scale. You actually think God would want all this division? No. He had to claim all of the original appearances by God were lies? God rode a chariot over his people, did many miracles, helped defeat enemies, no, he gives bad science to a messenger?

Doesn't want to make it easy? So he finds religious conflict appealing? He only shows up in the OT? OR, is it just that a guy is stretching the truth. I think it's that a guy is telling tales.

We only see the human characteristics of the Messenger, not their divine power, and the reason for that is explained below.

"... While the Manifestations of God all shine with the splendours of God's Revelation, they can reveal themselves in only two ways. The first is to appear in their naked glory. Should this happen, all human beings would witness their awesome power, would bow before their majesty and would submit their will entirely to God's Viceregent on earth. People would thus become puppets of God and lose their free will; all would follow the path of truth, not by their own volition but by capitulating to the irresistible power of the Manifestation of God………​

​

The only other way that the Manifestations of God can reveal themselves, which ensures the preservation of human free will, is to conceal their divine power behind the veil of human characteristics. Although they possess majestic, divine qualities, it is, according to Bahá’u’lláh, against the law of God for them to reveal these to the generality of mankind. Through this method people can exercise their free will to accept or to reject the Message of God, to live in accordance with His teachings or to disobey Him."​

​

Adib Taherzadeh, The Child of the Covenant, p. 17​

Yeah, of course he would write that. Yet he cannot use any of that power, even a little? Of course he's writing that. "Hey guys, I'm really a messenger, and yes I have divine powers, I could show you, but I can't........." The oldest con in the book?
In the OT Yahweh revealed his divine body MANY times, he didn't worry about that?
That, is a con.

Of course God knows that no religious Muslim or other religious person would ever leave their religion, but not because there is no evidence for the Baha'i Faith. After all, those older religions have nothing that the Baha'i Faith does not have. All they have are books with claims.

And Bahai only has books with claims? You literally just admitted it in the last post. right above?

Yes, I think they are wrong because I have evidence that indicates that the Baha'i Faith is right.

Show it then?
Messengers are not evidence, they are people making claims.
You may be so deep into the justification you don't even realize you are constantly talking in circles.

There is nothing suspicious about that. Humans don't need that kind of thing that was in the Bible anymore, as they have evolved beyond that point.

Uh, nope. No one is converting, apparently they still do need that type thing.

That's true, we all have scriptures we believe and none of us have proof.

there you go, none of you have proof. It's wishful confirmation bias.

If Jesus returned and all these conditions happened I could not claim it was wrong. But that is never going to happen.

Yes, that is what happened.

The conditions in Revelation did not happen. Read it.

Where does it say that? The Baha'i Faith teaches that we are human animals who have a soul, which is what distinguishes us from other animals.The Brand New Religious Principles of the Baha'i Faith

great, please demonstrate we have a soul, and when did it start in the hominid evolution? Also Bahai clearly didn't know about this evolution because it had not been discovered yet and he wasn't speaking to any Gods.

That is not the way you can know if the medium made contact. the only way you could know is if something came through the medium that only you and the departed spirit know. The medium should never be told this piece of information. The medium is only a mediator between the spirit world and this world.

Then why do messengers get information and tell other people? And why is there no information any human didn't already have?

 

[joelr]

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh is the book that I would recommend.

Below are some excerpts from the Introduction to Gleanings (which is not in the online version, only in the book):

“Gleanings is excerpts from various Tablets. In the introduction to Gleanings it explains how it is organized into five parts. Part one, pages 1-46, proclaims this as the “Day of God.” Part two, pages 46-136, concerns the Manifestation of God and His significance. Part three, pages 136-200, deals with basic questions concerning the soul and its immortality. Part four, pages 200-259, concerns the spiritual aspects of the World Order and the Most Great Peace. Part five, pages 259-346, deals with the duties of the individual and the spiritual meaning of life.”

This is the biggest bunch of _ _ I have ever seen.

I cannot believe you entered this as absolute proof.
The only page that even deals with proof of revelation, is one big bag of wind, I will write what he's saying in ( ).

Amongst the proofs demonstrating the truth of this Revelation is this, that in every age and Dispensation, whenever the invisible Essence was revealed in the person of His Manifestation, certain souls, obscure and detached from all worldly entanglements, would seek illumination from the Sun of Prophethood and Moon of Divine guidance, and would attain unto the Divine Presence. For this reason, the divines of the age and those possessed of wealth, would scorn and scoff at these people. Even as He hath revealed concerning them that erred: “Then said the chiefs of His people who believed not, ‘We see in Thee but a man like ourselves; and we see not any who have followed Thee except our meanest ones of hasty judgment, nor see we any excellence in you above ourselves: nay, we deem you liars.’” They caviled at those holy Manifestations, and protested saying: “None hath followed you except the abject amongst us, those who are worthy of 180 no attention.” Their aim was to show that no one amongst the learned, the wealthy, and the renowned believed in them. By this and similar proofs they sought to demonstrate the falsity of Him that speaketh naught but the truth.


(People claimed revelations, no one believed except those not worthy of attention)

I'm skipping the rest, obviously he goes on to say in way too many words that then people believed him.
Who cares? There is no proof AT ALL. What he does is write REALLY LONG LONG LONG sentences with fancy words, that is not proof of anything.

This is your proof? Wow.

The last thing on earth I want is for this to be true. My late husband knew that only too well since we had many late night discussions that ended in him asking me why I don't become an atheist.

Your belief in something, and your motivation has no bearing on the actual truthfullness of it.
However when anyone believes a doctrine that allows for life after death I suspect there is a motivation of a relief of the fear of death and the unknown. While reasonable, I would rather know true things.