God’s Method of delivering messages, is it flawed?

[Trailblazer]

When you say "You" do you just Joe or do you mean the billions who are confused which god is the true one with the true messengers?

Thanks for asking. I appreciate directness.

What I said to Joe applies to everyone as God takes no orders from anyone.

I am truly sorry for the billions of people are confused about God, but the ONLY WAY to fix that is if everyone recognizes Baha'u'llah and reads what He wrote. Till they do that everyone will continue to believe that they have the right God and the right beliefs and atheists will remain in the dark about God.

Baha'u'llah said people would be confused about God so that means that God knew that would happen....
Regarding that confusion, this is what He wrote. if you need help interpreting that I will be glad to help.

“What “oppression” is greater than that which hath been recounted? What “oppression” is more grievous than that a soul seeking the truth, and wishing to attain unto the knowledge of God, should know not where to go for it and from whom to seek it? For opinions have sorely differed, and the ways unto the attainment of God have multiplied. This “oppression” is the essential feature of every Revelation. Unless it cometh to pass, the Sun of Truth will not be made manifest. For the break of the morn of divine guidance must needs follow the darkness of the night of error. For this reason, in all chronicles and traditions reference hath been 32 made unto these things, namely that iniquity shall cover the surface of the earth and darkness shall envelop mankind. As the traditions referred to are well known, and as the purpose of this servant is to be brief, He will refrain from quoting the text of these traditions.” The Kitab-i-Iqan, pp. 31-32

 

[Trailblazer]

And a desire for change means that there is something about the current state is not perfect.

That's right.

 

[Trailblazer]

What's so bad about the world today that hasn't happened in the past?

Why would it matter if it also happened in the past? It is happening in the present.

There are some things today such as climate change and overpopulation that threaten our very existence.

 

[ppp]

That's right.

I know I'm right.

 

[Trailblazer]

You're fortunate to have a few million followers with the unworkable plans.

The plans are workable and the job will get done, because this is a divinely ordained religion.

About 100 years ago, long before there were millions of Baha'is, Abdu'l-Baha said to the Baha'is:

“When Christ appeared He manifested Himself at Jerusalem. He called men to the Kingdom of God, He invited them to Eternal Life and He told them to acquire human perfections. The Light of Guidance was shed forth by that radiant Star, and He at length gave His life in sacrifice for humanity.

All through His blessed life He suffered oppression and hardship, and in spite of all this humanity was His enemy!

They denied Him, scorned Him, ill-treated Him and cursed Him. He was not treated like a man—and yet in spite of all this He was the embodiment of pity and of supreme goodness and love……..

It was not until many years after His ascension that they knew who He was, and at the time of His ascension He had only a very few disciples; only a comparatively small following believed His precepts and followed His laws. The ignorant said, ‘Who is this individual; He has only a few disciples!’ But those who knew said: ‘He is the Sun who will shine in the East and in the West, He is the Manifestation who shall give life to the world’.

What the first disciples had seen the world realized later.” Paris Talks, pp, 116-117

 

[CG Didymus]

The plans are workable and the job will get done, because this is a divinely ordained religion.

About 100 years ago, long before there were millions of Baha'is, Abdu'l-Baha said to the Baha'is:

“When Christ appeared He manifested Himself at Jerusalem. He called men to the Kingdom of God, He invited them to Eternal Life and He told them to acquire human perfections. The Light of Guidance was shed forth by that radiant Star, and He at length gave His life in sacrifice for humanity.

All through His blessed life He suffered oppression and hardship, and in spite of all this humanity was His enemy!

They denied Him, scorned Him, ill-treated Him and cursed Him. He was not treated like a man—and yet in spite of all this He was the embodiment of pity and of supreme goodness and love……..

It was not until many years after His ascension that they knew who He was, and at the time of His ascension He had only a very few disciples; only a comparatively small following believed His precepts and followed His laws. The ignorant said, ‘Who is this individual; He has only a few disciples!’ But those who knew said: ‘He is the Sun who will shine in the East and in the West, He is the Manifestation who shall give life to the world’.

What the first disciples had seen the world realized later.” Paris Talks, pp, 116-117

And what message did those early Christians believe? When Christianity finally caught on, what was the message that was being preached? Anyway, it wasn't that long ago that the Christian message was hell fire for sinners, and that all people were sinners. And that the only way to avoid God's wrath was to accept Jesus. And to accept Jesus was to accept that he was God. And, if a person didn't believe in Jesus, they were being deceived by Satan the devil. They were also told that Satan had demons out there that could possess people. That message was fairly successful, but were there flaws in that Christian message?

 

[Trailblazer]

And what message did those early Christians believe? When Christianity finally caught on, what was the message that was being preached? Anyway, it wasn't that long ago that the Christian message was hell fire for sinners, and that all people were sinners. And that the only way to avoid God's wrath was to accept Jesus. And to accept Jesus was to accept that he was God. And, if a person didn't believe in Jesus, they were being deceived by Satan the devil. They were also told that Satan had demons out there that could possess people. That message was fairly successful, but were there flaws in that Christian message?

It all changed after Paul showed up on the scene.

“That the figure of the Nazarene, as delivered to us in Mark’s Gospel, is decisively different from the pre-existent risen Christ proclaimed by Paul, is something long recognized by thinkers like Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Herder and Goethe, to mention only a few. The distinction between ‘the religion of Christ’ and ‘the Christian religion’ goes back to Lessing. Critical theological research has now disputed the idea of an uninterrupted chain of historical succession: Luther’s belief that at all times a small handful of true Christians preserved the true apostolic faith. Walter Bauer (226) and Martin Werner (227) have brought evidence that there was conflict from the outset about the central questions of dogma. It has become clear that the beliefs of those who had seen and heard Jesus in the flesh --- the disciples and the original community--- were at odds to an extraordinary degree with the teaching of Paul, who claimed to have been not only called by a vision but instructed by the heavenly Christ. The conflict at Antioch between the apostles Peter and Paul, far more embittered as research has shown (228) than the Bible allows us to see, was the most fateful split in Christianity, which in the Acts of the Apostles was ‘theologically camouflaged’. (229)

Paul, who had never seen Jesus, showed great reserve towards the Palestinian traditions regarding Jesus’ life. (230) The historical Jesus and his earthly life are without significance for Paul. In all his epistles the name ‘Jesus’ occurs only 15 times, the title ‘Christ’ 378 times. In Jesus’s actual teaching he shows extraordinarily little interest. It is disputed whether in all his epistles he makes two, three or four references to sayings by Jesus. (231) It is not Jesus’ teaching, which he cannot himself have heard at all (short of hearing it in a vision), that is central to his own mission, but the person of the Redeemer and His death on the Cross.

Jesus, who never claimed religious worship for himself was not worshipped in the original community, is for Paul the pre-existent risen Christ….

This was the ‘Fall’ of Christianity: that Paul with his ‘Gospel’, which became the core of Christian dogma formation, conquered the world, (237) while the historic basis of Christianity was declared a heresy….

Pauline heresy served as the basis for Christian orthodoxy, and the legitimate Church was outlawed as heretical’. (240) The ‘small handful of true Christians’ was Nazarene Christianity, which was already extinct in the fourth century……

The centerpiece then, of Christian creedal doctrine, that of Redemption, is something of which—in the judgment of the theologian E. Grimm (244) --- Jesus himself knew nothing; and it goes back to Paul. “

(Udo Schaefer, Light Shineth in Darkness, Studies in revelation after Christ )

How Paul changed the course of Christianity

 

[night912]

No, because God does not need everyone to receive his message.

No, that's what you want to do.

A want and a need are not the same thing.

Strawman. I never said, nor am I arguing that "want" and "need" are the same thing. Try again.

I might want a new Mercedes but I do not need one because I have an old Honda. I would have to give up other things I want in order to procure a new Mercedes, so I am happy to settle for my old Honda.

That's an incorrect/inaccurate analogy. Your analogy deals with "want" and "need" of material things, which is different from what is being discussed regarding God. I use your example above about cars and present an accurate/correct analogy by focusing where the "want" and "need" should be.

You WANT to possess and/or have possession of the new Mercedes and in order to achieve that "want," you NEED to give up other things. You failed to do what was needed to obtain what you wanted, that's why you don't possessed the Mercedes.

Now apply my analogy to what is being discussed regarding God. God wants everyone to receive his message. In order to get what he wanted, he needs a method of delivering his message that is not flawed. But since God's method is flawed, he did not get what he wanted.

 

[night912]

If there is someone, god or otherwise, who wants me to believe that they exist, but is unwilling to do the things that would convince me, then that someone is either incapable of doing those things, or that someone is a dolt.

Or that someone is not a servant who takes orders from you.

God is not your servant. God is under no obligation to convince you of anything.

You both are forgetting one. God doesn't WANT to. And that answers both, "God wants you to believe that he exist" and "God wants everyone to receive his message."

Being a servant and/or being obligated, are irrelevant. Those have nothing to do with "want."

EX:
If I am an emperor and my servant comes up to me and demanded that I pay him $100/hr more than what he is currently being paid, there's only three possible outcomes regarding his demand.

1. I want to pay my servant, therefore, I pay him.
2. I don't want to pay my servant, therefore, I don't pay him.
3. I'm incapable of paying my servant eventhough I want or don't want to, therefore, I don't pay him.

Anything and everything else, falls under those three.

 

[night912]

You expect God to do the things that would convince you if He is capable. Otherwise you consider God a dolt.
If that is not what you are saying, correct me.

Why should God do the things that would convince you just because God is capable of doing those things?

I can say for certain about myself, but through observations of their responses provided, the majority of atheists are not arguing about an actual god. Instead, they are arguing against the beliefs held by theists(any and/or all in regards to a god) then applying logic and reasoning. I've noticed that a lot of theists do not see and/or understand this.

So whenever it someone falls back to having this reply, "Why should God do the things that would convince you just because God is capable of doing those things?" or similar ones, the discussion will either be, pointless/useless, be filled special pleadings, and/or dishonesty. In order to have an honest and intellectual discussion, special pleading must be left out and must be based on logic. And by logic, I mean, the capacity of human understanding. Pretty much anything else is just dishonest.

An example of a dishonest discussion would be to argue that a god's understanding of logic and reasoning is beyond our capability. That would make the whole discussion pointless.

An example of an honest discussion, regardless of the topic, is based on our capacity of understanding, without even the need of pointing that out and/mentioning it.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Why not? Because an All-Powerful God does not take orders from humans. That is logic 101 stuff.

“To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish.” Gleanings, p. 73

• That means that if God does not wish to give everyone a personal message or demonstrate His existence. God is not going to do it.

“He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.”Gleanings, p. 209

• That means that if God does not choose to give everyone a personal message or demonstrate His existence. God is not going to do it.

“He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain.”Gleanings, p, 284

• That means is not our right to ask God to give everyone a personal message or demonstrate His existence. We get what God ordains, nothing more and nothing less.

Now give me one good reason why God should give everyone a personal message or demonstrate His existence.

A great excuse to hide the non-existence of any god. Stick with this and the "Only special peopleget the message" excuse to make sure you don't answer questions.

■The oneness of God
■The essential unity of religion
■The unity of mankind
■Harmony of religion and science
■Independent investigation of truth
■The need for universal compulsory education
■The need for a universal auxiliary language
■Obedience to government and non-involvement in partisan politics

What do the above mean?

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

What God wants us to do is for our own benefit. God does not need anything from humans, including our belief.

So why is it for our own benefit to drop everything that identifies us?

■The oneness of God
■The essential unity of religion
■The unity of mankind
■Harmony of religion and science
■Independent investigation of truth
■The need for universal compulsory education
■The need for a universal auxiliary language
■Obedience to government and non-involvement in partisan politics

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Thanks for asking. I appreciate directness.

What I said to Joe applies to everyone as God takes no orders from anyone.

I am truly sorry for the billions of people are confused about God, but the ONLY WAY to fix that is if everyone recognizes Baha'u'llah and reads what He wrote. Till they do that everyone will continue to believe that they have the right God and the right beliefs and atheists will remain in the dark about God.

Baha'u'llah said people would be confused about God so that means that God knew that would happen....
Regarding that confusion, this is what He wrote. if you need help interpreting that I will be glad to help.

So everyone drops the things that they now believe and follow Bahaullah. But you're not in the business of converting them.

■The oneness of God
■The essential unity of religion
■The unity of mankind
■Harmony of religion and science
■Independent investigation of truth
■The need for universal compulsory education
■The need for a universal auxiliary language
■Obedience to government and non-involvement in partisan politics

So people know what they have to do.

 

[Goddess Kit]

What's flawed is man thinking particular messages are from any sort of deity.

Other than this message from me to you, of course.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

The plans are workable and the job will get done, because this is a divinely ordained religion.

How does this deal with climate change, overpopulation, the devastation of the worlds resources, consumerism, etc?

■The oneness of God
■The essential unity of religion
■The unity of mankind
■Harmony of religion and science
■Independent investigation of truth
■The need for universal compulsory education
■The need for a universal auxiliary language
■Obedience to government and non-involvement in partisan politics

It was a plan to stop wars, not save the planet. You only turned to save the planet after I brought it up.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

It all changed after Paul showed up on the scene.

“That the figure of the Nazarene, as delivered to us in Mark’s Gospel, is decisively different from the pre-existent risen Christ proclaimed by Paul, is something long recognized by thinkers like Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Herder and Goethe, to mention only a few. The distinction between ‘the religion of Christ’ and ‘the Christian religion’ goes back to Lessing. Critical theological research has now disputed the idea of an uninterrupted chain of historical succession: Luther’s belief that at all times a small handful of true Christians preserved the true apostolic faith. Walter Bauer (226) and Martin Werner (227) have brought evidence that there was conflict from the outset about the central questions of dogma. It has become clear that the beliefs of those who had seen and heard Jesus in the flesh --- the disciples and the original community--- were at odds to an extraordinary degree with the teaching of Paul, who claimed to have been not only called by a vision but instructed by the heavenly Christ. The conflict at Antioch between the apostles Peter and Paul, far more embittered as research has shown (228) than the Bible allows us to see, was the most fateful split in Christianity, which in the Acts of the Apostles was ‘theologically camouflaged’. (229)

Paul, who had never seen Jesus, showed great reserve towards the Palestinian traditions regarding Jesus’ life. (230) The historical Jesus and his earthly life are without significance for Paul. In all his epistles the name ‘Jesus’ occurs only 15 times, the title ‘Christ’ 378 times. In Jesus’s actual teaching he shows extraordinarily little interest. It is disputed whether in all his epistles he makes two, three or four references to sayings by Jesus. (231) It is not Jesus’ teaching, which he cannot himself have heard at all (short of hearing it in a vision), that is central to his own mission, but the person of the Redeemer and His death on the Cross.

Jesus, who never claimed religious worship for himself was not worshipped in the original community, is for Paul the pre-existent risen Christ….

This was the ‘Fall’ of Christianity: that Paul with his ‘Gospel’, which became the core of Christian dogma formation, conquered the world, (237) while the historic basis of Christianity was declared a heresy….

Pauline heresy served as the basis for Christian orthodoxy, and the legitimate Church was outlawed as heretical’. (240) The ‘small handful of true Christians’ was Nazarene Christianity, which was already extinct in the fourth century……

The centerpiece then, of Christian creedal doctrine, that of Redemption, is something of which—in the judgment of the theologian E. Grimm (244) --- Jesus himself knew nothing; and it goes back to Paul. “

(Udo Schaefer, Light Shineth in Darkness, Studies in revelation after Christ )

How Paul changed the course of Christianity

You have just demonstrated how religions are created by Men. Whether it's Mark, Paul, Peter or Bahaullah it's Men doing the work. Nothing to do with any god. A god would be sending one message consistently, not changing the messages to fit the people.

 

[night912]

Now give me one good reason why God should give everyone a personal message or demonstrate His existence.

Because God WANTS to.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

I am truly sorry for the billions of people are confused about God, but the ONLY WAY to fix that is if everyone recognizes Baha'u'llah and reads what He wrote. Till they do that everyone will continue to believe that they have the right God and the right beliefs and atheists will remain in the dark about God.
​

Read that to see what Baha'is really want, the blind acceptance of what they believe with no dissension. Because any disagreement to Bahaullah is treason to their cause.

Should you read what he says, find fault in the holy words of their master, they will deal with you.

 

[night912]

A perfect being would have no wants.

That's absolutely correct. God wants nothing for Himself because God if fully self-sufficient.

The only reason that God wants us to believe in Him and get His message is for our own benefit.

You just contradicted yourself with your preparation in moving the goalpost. Prepping with the word, "Himself," isn't going to help you.

 

[night912]

I am truly sorry for the billions of people are confused about God, but the ONLY WAY to fix that is if everyone recognizes Baha'u'llah and reads what He wrote. Till they do that everyone will continue to believe that they have the right God and the right beliefs and atheists will remain in the dark about God.
​

Read that to see what Baha'is really want, the blind acceptance of what they believe with no dissension. Because any disagreement to Bahaullah is treason to their cause.

Should you read what he says, find fault in the holy words of their master, they will deal with you.

Care to make a wager?

I say the response will be along the lines of something like......

"You misinterpret/misunderstood what was said."