Do you trust God?

[CG Didymus]

The question is whether it has already happened or will happen in some real distant future (428,899 CE). If you refuse to believe that Bahaollah was Kalki, then you are not a Bahai. Because in that case, Bahaollah will not be fulfilling a prophesy in Hinduism. That will also mean that he was a false prophet. Why are Bahais always so confused?

And if Baha'u'llah was the return of Krishna as Kalki, it should be clear and obvious. But it's not all that clear that he is the return of Buddha, Christ or anyone else.

Has all that was predicted to happen before the return of any of these people already happened? Cataclysmic events were foretold. Did they happen in the 1800's? Or are they starting to happen now? Or are they always happening?

 

[Trailblazer]

And the question has to be answered by the Baha'i Faith.

Why does it have to be answered by the Baha'i Faith? Buddhism and Hinduism are not our religions. We have a new religion and new scriptures which were revealed by Baha'u'llah.

 

[Truthseeker]

It is the problem of Baha'is claiming that progressive revelation is true. That God sent different manifestations at different times to different places. But because the beliefs and messages are so different, I don't believe that the source of those messages was the same God. The same God that also gave the messages to the Israelites. That gave his messages through Jesus and Muhammad and through The Bab and Baha'u'llah. Oh, and the forgotten one, Zoroaster.

Yes, the beliefs are different for the followers. You have to dig deep within the messages to see they are compatible. Not the same, compatible. If you see them on the surface you won't see that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Why does it have to be answered by the Baha'i Faith? Buddhism and Hinduism are not our religions. We have a new religion and new scriptures which were revealed by Baha'u'llah.

Another Bahai shenanigan. These who are supposed to have returned were sent by your Allah. They are your 'manifestations'. Do you think that these religions have no truth? Were they not talking of peace, love and brotherhood? That is what your Allah desires and that is what Bahaollah also said. Bahaollah is just one in line. And you are disrespecting all these religions. Why then you have a nine pointed symbol? Is it only for show or to fool people?

 

[CG Didymus]

Why does it have to be answered by the Baha'i Faith? Buddhism and Hinduism are not our religions. We have a new religion and new scriptures which were revealed by Baha'u'llah.

Are Hinduism and Buddhism true religions? Are Krishna and Buddha manifestations of God? Baha'is answer those questions all the time. The next on the list would be... What are the authoritative Scriptures of those religions? Baha'is have an answer for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and probably for Zoroastrianism too. Why not with Hinduism and Buddhism? Riggs puts it out there that the seven seals on this book are the Holy Books of the seven religions. But obviously, there is no such thing. Riggs is making it up.

 

[CG Didymus]

Yes, the beliefs are different for the followers. You have to dig deep within the messages to see they are compatible. Not the same, compatible. If you see them on the surface you won't see that.

I have no problem making all the religions compatible. And Baha'is are so close to saying the same thing I'm saying... That the differences were because of additions people added into the Scriptures. I take it a little further and think that people wrote the whole thing plus the additions. That the whole thing could very well be the myths and legends of a people and their God. If that's so, then I think people should stop believe in superstitious myths and live by religious and spiritual truths we all can believe in. And that is almost what the Baha'is are saying also.

 

[Trailblazer]

Another Bahai shenanigan. These who are supposed to have returned were sent by your Allah. They are your 'manifestations'. Do you think that these religions have no truth? Were they not talking of peace, love and brotherhood? That is what your Allah desires and that is what Bahaollah also said. Bahaollah is just one in line. And you are disrespecting all these religions. Why then you have a nine pointed symbol? Is it only for show or to fool people?

You did not answer my question. "Why does it have to be answered by the Baha'i Faith? Buddhism and Hinduism are not our religions."

That does not mean that Baha'is disrespect all those religions. It only means that we are not obligated to know everything about them.

 

[Trailblazer]

Are Hinduism and Buddhism true religions? Are Krishna and Buddha manifestations of God? Baha'is answer those questions all the time. The next on the list would be... What are the authoritative Scriptures of those religions? Baha'is have an answer for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and probably for Zoroastrianism too. Why not with Hinduism and Buddhism?

Why not with Hinduism and Buddhism? Because it is not in the Baha'i Writings so we have no authoritative answer. All we would have is a personal opinion which would be no more accurate than your personal opinion.

Riggs puts it out there that the seven seals on this book are the Holy Books of the seven religions. But obviously, there is no such thing. Riggs is making it up.

You are free to believe whatever you want. I won't bother posting any more from his book.

 

[Aupmanyav]

It only means that we are not obligated to know everything about them.

You are obligated to know what the manifestations who came before Bahaollah said. They are the manifestations accepted by Bahais. Don't Bahais quote from Torah, Bible an Quran? Where do you get the prophecies that Bahaollah is supposed to have fulfilled? They are the religions from which your religion originated. Don't you worship the God of Abraham? Is there any break from the original religion given to Adam by Allah. What Bahaollah said was (as you think) only a course correction. Then what is the problem about Hinduism and Buddhism?

"Buddhism and Hinduism are not our religions.": I think that is a very shameful thing to say for a Bahai, while accepting the mission of Krishna and Buddha.
"Because it is not in the Baha'i Writings so we have no authoritative answer.": What? That is preposterous. Allah forgot to say any thing about Hinduism and Buddhism. He himself chose Krishna and Buddha as his messengers. Even Bahaollah forgot to say anything authoritative about them. Forgetful Allah and his forgetful manifestation. That is mighty funny. It is getting funnier by the day.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are obligated to know what the manifestations who came before Bahaollah said. They are the manifestations accepted by Bahais.

No, we are not obligated, and in real life off the forums Baha'is do not even talk about the previous religions. We believe that all the previous religious dispensations have been abrogated so there is no reason we need to know anything those Messengers said.

Baha'u'llah wrote:

“Moreover, it is not Our wish to relate the stories of the days that are past…. this servant regardeth the consideration of such records a grave mistake and a grievous transgression.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 63

 

[KWED]

That might have happened with the scriptures of the older religions but it has not happened with the Writings of Baha'u'llah since we have the original Writings penned in the hand of Baha'u'llah and stamped with His official seal, and they will never be altered by man. They have been translated into many languages but the originals still exist in Persian and Arabic for those who understand those languages.

You say his writings will "never be altered by man", and yet in your claims of magical prophecy, you alter the actual words he wrote into something quite different and they say "Look, magic!"
The only magic is the ability to make otherwise rational people believe such nonsense.

 

[KWED]

That's because we alone are blameworthy. God cannot be to blame because God cannot make mistakes, since God is infallible.

So when god causes an earthquake that collapses a school and kills 100 children, it's not his fault, it's ours.
So when god gives children cancer it's not his fault, it's ours.
So when it doesn't rain for two years and the crops fail and children starve it's not god's fault, it's ours.

This means either...
1. There are natural events that happen in the world that god has no control over, or
2. God is a like a spoiled child who tries to blame his actions on others.
Which is it?

 

[KWED]

From the looks of it, that seems to be the case.
I wonder why that is. Could it be that they are not really trying to understand?
Either that or they have poor reading comprehension skills.
Or maybe they deliberately distort what I say for their own purposes.

No, what you have been saying is easy to understand. It is an all-too-common combination of indoctrination, cognitive dissonance, wishful thinking and excessive credulity. The details are unimportant as the principle is seen amongst religionists of all brands.

 

[KWED]

So you have proved a bias by stating that there is a bias.
Seems reasonable.

You have shown confirmation bias by insisting that the texts your belief are evidence for the truth of that belief.

STRAW MAN... Either that or you are unable to read and comprehend plain English.
I never claimed that ANY passages are evidence of miraculous messages from a God, never ever.

You said that some passages contain magical prophesies and are therefore evidence Bahaullah was a messenger of god.

So, if you now withdraw claim, what is this "evidence" in his writings that you claim proves he was a messenger of god?

 

[KWED]

No, that is not correct at all.
Baha'is do not believe that Baha'u'llah is a Messenger of God because he tells us he is. That would be circular reasoning.

Jeez, it's like a foreign language, isn't it?

* Baha'is come to believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God by researching his life and mission.

So what is it about his life that proves he was a messenger of god (KEY POINT)?

* After we come to believe in Baha'u'llah we believe what Baha'u'llah wrote is the truth.

So you believe he was a messenger of god because he tells you he was.

* We believe that God exists because Baha'u'llah wrote about God.

So you believe god exists because he tells you god exists.

So this all hinges on that KEY POINT. You need to explain exactly what it is that Bahaullah said and did that convinces you he was a messenger of god - because at the moment all you are really saying is you believe he was a messenger of god because he says he was.
Every time you claim that is not the case, you present an argument that essentially confirms it. (That is the confirmation bias I was talking about earlier. Your argument is clearly and demonstrably flawed but you are unable to recognise that. )

 

[KWED]

Not quite. I know what the true God is because Baha'u'llah explained that in His Writings.

Dear god! That is the same thing!
Your religion = what Bahaullah explained in his writings.

Yes, that is what happened. My parents were not religious and I was raised as a nonbeliever. I never thought about God or religion until my first year of college when I stumbled upon the Baha'i Faith. I investigated the Baha'i Faith and I was convinced that it was true. That happened 51 years ago.

So we are back to that KEY POINT again.
What was it about Bahullah's writings that convinced you a god existed and that he was a messenger of that god.

The issue here is that there is nothing about his writings that would convince a well-adjusted, rational thinker that the Abrahamic god exists, magic is real, and everything science tells us about the universe is wrong. Don't get me wrong, I can understand how they might appeal to the excessively credulous wishful thinker, or the psychologically vulnerable or traumatised looking for "answers". Most religions can do that, especially when presented by a charismatic and welcoming person or group.

 

[KWED]

My independent investigation was an independent investigation and I had NO confirmation bias since I had nothing to confirm, since I had no preexisting beliefs.

When I asked you for sources for you "independent investigation", you linked to Baha'i propaganda written by a Baha'i apologist. "Independent" means that is is not connected to the thing you are investigating.

Oh, have you done an independent critical analysis of the Baha'i Faith? When did you do that?

I have read about his life. I have read some of his writings. I have read apologists' arguments in favour of it. None of it is any more reasonable than the claims of any other religion. It fundamentally relies on acceptance of unsupported claims.

Please show me where I ever insisted upon anything.

You keep insisting that a god exists and that Bahaullah was his messenger.
Now, if you are actually saying that it is merely your belief and you could be wrong, then fair enough.

I have evidence, you just don't consider it evidence.

No, you don't have evidence. You have belief.

STRAW MAN. Please stop misrepresenting what I said. I never said that.

You have repeatedly stated that you know god exists because of Bahaullah's writings. IOW because he told you.

 

[KWED]

STRAW MAN . Please stop misrepresenting what I said.
How many times have I said the following on this forum? Dozens of times.

I do not believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger because He claimed to be a Messenger of God.
The way I determined that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger was by investigating the truth of His claims.

Ye gods, it gets worse...

offering, as the supreme proofs of His Prophethood, His words and works

IOW, his "proof" that the was a messenger of god is his claim that he is a messenger of god.

and their effects in transforming the lives and characters of men.”

So anyone who can transform people's lives or character is a messenger of god?

I never said the evidence that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God is that He told us that He is a Messenger of God. How many times do I have to repeat this?

You just presented a quote that said precisely that!
"offering, as the supreme proofs of His Prophethood, His words"

No, there is no proof that His Writings are true, all we have is the evidence that indicates the truth of His claims.

I still have a nagging suspicion that you are actually a very sophisticated troll.
"proof that His Writings are true"
"evidence that indicates the truth of His claims"
These two statements are identical!

 

[KWED]

You have no omnipotence, only God is omnipotent.

Jeez, I'd have more luck explaining the offside rule to my gran...

You claimed that god's omnipotence doesn't mean he can do absolutely anything, only what it is in his nature to do.
Therefore my "omnipotence" is the same as your god's, because likewise I cannot do absolutely anything, only what it is in my nature to do.

Please show me where God ever inflicted any killing and suffering and evil on the world.

You claim that everything happens by god's will. If you "will" something then you actively make it happen.
Therefore the earthquake that crushed 100 children in a school was "god's will".
The babies with cancer are "god's will".
The many millions who died in agony from disease and hunger over the last 100,000 years were all "god's will".

As you believe in, worship and agree with this god, can you explain why he does all this (and much, much more)?

God does not have to live up to any human standards. God is all-good by His nature.

By what standards? By our any human standard, he is clearly not all good. By the moral standards he imposes on us he is clearly not "all good". On what do you base the claim that he is "all good"? It certainly isn't any evidence. Don't tell me, is it because Bahaullah tells you he is all good?

God is not subject to the Laws that He reveals for humans to follow.

Classic tyrant.

God does not impose any Laws upon humans. Humans are free to choose to follow the Laws of God or not.

In which case they are not "laws" but "advice".

Everything that happens is according to God's will because it can only happen if God allows it to happen.

So not you accept that all that death and suffering is due to "god's will".

Free will exists because God gave man free will but God can override our free will choices, if He chooses to.

You are contradicting yourself.
Either everything happens by god's will, or it doesn't.
Which is it?

 

[KWED]

The evidence that....
* A God exists.
* It is the God I worship
* Baha'u'llah actually communicated with God
is embedded in the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
If Baha'u'llah was a true Messenger of God, then everything He wrote is true.

Still persevering with the circular reasoning, I see.

The only way we can now if the claims of Baha'u'llah (which are embedded in the Writings of Baha'u'llah) are true is by looking at everything that supports the claims of Baha'u'llah. This is called independent investigation of truth.

So - and this is the important bit that you keep avoiding - what are the things that this "investigation" brought to light that support Bahullah's claim that a specific god exists and he was its messenger.

Like getting blood out of a stone!