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

[CG Didymus]

You are attributing motives to the Baha'is that you do not know that have. I cannot speak for any other Baha'is, but I know that is not my motive for posting threads.

I do not have to convince myself, I absolutely know that what the Baha'i Faith teaches is the truth and that Baha'u'llah was a Manifestation of God. 100%. That is one reason I am willing to take all manner of criticism and defend the Faith.

You might want to pay a little closer attention to what I am posting because I am not arguing with anyone; I am explaining things and using logical reasoning. Show me where I was unkind or unloving.

I am not trying to win anything, including arguments. Defending when attacked is not arguing.

Of course your not. You are the most loving and kind person I know. It's a total pleasure conversing with you. I learn so much about the love of God and the truth of the Baha'i Faith from you. God bless you always.

 

[CG Didymus]

Prove my beliefs wrong?
I have not heard anything that funny all year, but it is only September 23.

Keep going with those prophecies, you are not going to prove the Baha'i Faith is wrong, you will only prove it is right.

No, you post a map of ancient Assyria that shows how far east it goes. Then let's see if it covers the part of Iran where Teheran is located. That's all. Just prove some of your bull %&*$. Just saying things are "funny" is the stupidest thing I've ever heard you do. I said "might" prove your B.S. wrong.

 

[columbus]

Keep going with those prophecies, you are not going to prove the Baha'i Faith is wrong, you will only prove it is right.

That's one of advantages to an assertion based on really weak evidence, like 150 year old hearsay.

The evidence can only get stronger from there.
Tom

 

[Trailblazer]

IF an all-powerful, all-knowing god actually existed, "revelations" which are then orally transmitted and eventually written down, would not be his method of communication, because such a god would know even better then we do how it's about the dumbest thing he could do.

If that is your personal opinion, fine and dandy, but if you are asserting that as an actual FACT, then it is an argument from ignorance because there is NO WAY you could EVER know that, absolutely no way.

Argument from ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,

1. true
2. false
3. unknown between true or false
4. being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia

I'm sure such a God, for example, would know about the problems that are exposed in the so-called "telephone game".

I'm sure such a god would also realize how centuries down the line, people would have to be relying on copies of copies of translations of copies of translations of copies of copies of copies of..... with no originals to be seen anywhere.

I am sure God knows all of that, because God is All-Knowing.

If I were such a god, and I'ld go for text to communicate, I'ld definatly create the book myself and use indestructible material. I might even make it a magic book so that the text always appears in the language of the reader - realising very well that most of the languages used "today" wouldn't even exist anymore 2000 years from now.

I'ld also send exact copies of this book to all corners of the world, to all people, so that there wasn't a single culture without access to it, instead of relying on a bunch of illiterate primitive goat herders of "spreading the word".

But you are NOT God, so you do not get to decide how to communicate to humans.

But that didn't happen. Instead, the people he encountered had never heared of Jawhe and stuff. Instead, they believed in extremely different gods which were extremely incompatible with the christian one.

That's correct, what you suggested did not happen, because God is in the driver's seat and God chose the Method of communication, all the whole KNOWING what the end result would be.

The demographics of religion, look exactly like it would look if religions are human inventions. Every (sub)culture has their own mutually exclusive religion. This is 100% consistent with religion being a human invention. It is not at all consistent with 1 religion being a "true" religion, with a god that cares for humans and wants them to know about him.

The demographics of religion look exactly like it would look if different religions were revealed by God in every age. In the Baha'i Faith, that is called Progressive Revelation

Progressive revelation is a core teaching in the Bahá'í Faith that suggests that religious truth is revealed by God progressively and cyclically over time through a series of divine Messengers, and that the teachings are tailored to suit the needs of the time and place of their appearance.[1][2] Thus, the Bahá'í teachings recognize the divine origin of several world religions as different stages in the history of one religion, while believing that the revelation of Bahá'u'lláh is the most recent (though not the last—that there will never be a last), and therefore the most relevant to modern society.[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_revelation_Baha'i

Progressive revelation is not at all consistent with one religion being a "true" religion, it is consistent with all the religions that were revealed by God being true. This is consistent with a God that cares for humans and wants them to know about Him.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your problem is you believe in one man's interpretation of religious truth. When there are 1,000s of different interpretations. Someone has to be lying if not all of them. And this "God can never be demonstrated in the material world" makes the lies easy and gives the liars an easy out.

No, someone does not have to be lying, but some one has to be mistaken. There is a BIG difference between lying which is deliberately telling an untruth, and simply not knowing the truth so being mistaken.

God can never be demonstrated in the material world is just the simple truth. God is Spirit as the Bible says, so God can never be seen and demonstrated. That is why Jesus said:

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

1 John 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

So is the method of using messengers as a method of delivering a message flawed? Certainly, because it gives liars the opportunity to lie.

There have been many so-called false messengers who have lied, but logically speaking, a true Messenger of God would have no reason to lie and would not lie because holy men do not lie.

The bottom line is whether there have ever been any true Messengers of God. If there have been any then certain conclusions can be drawn, but if there haven't been any, other conclusions will be drawn.

 

[Trailblazer]

The logical explanation is that only 1 can be right and all the rest wrong. So it's up to you to work out the right one.

That is your personal opinion to which you are entitled but I see it differently. I think the logical explanation is that all the great religions were right for the times and to the places and peoples where they were revealed, but over time people and the world change so a new religion is needed. That is why God sends a new Messenger in every age to renew religion.

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

Given that the original book Abrahamic religions are based on is wrong on so many things, that this god allowed us, Humans, to exist for so long without a word from him. I know the book is an invention of men and has no message from any god.

Again, that is your personal opinion, but if you are stating it as an assertion that would be a bald assertion, because you can never prove that what you are saying is true. It would also be an argument from ignorance. I am not saying that you are ignorant, this is a logical fallacy.

Argument from ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false.

Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia

 

[Trailblazer]

You got your figures wrong.

The problem with pulling up quotes that suit your argument is it's easy to pull up other quotes that contradict yours. Even so given that the majority of the world isn't as educated as to the West, that most have been brainwashed as children into believing in a various religion and many just pay lip service to religion the numbers are far lower.

Those are not my figures, they were cited in Wikipedia, with references. If you have different figures you are welcome to post them.

According to these statistics, 84 percent of the world population has a faith. If 7% of the world population are positive atheists that would mean that about 9% of people are agnostic or believe in God but have no religion.

I am not saying I think that 93% of people in the world are "true believers" because as some of those people are probably just people who adhere to a religion and pay lip service to it.

 

[Trailblazer]

I know there is no god. So no need to worry about me being uncomfortable.

You know there is no God? I am sorry, but that is the biggest argument from ignorance that I have ever seen.

Argument from ignorance asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,

1. true
2. false
3. unknown between true or false
4. being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

Argument from ignorance - Wikipedia

When atheists stop making assertions they cannot prove, that is when I will stop pointing out that they are committing that fallacy.

Your arrogance towards people who don't believe illustrates why you chose such a minor interpretation of the bible.

I have no arrogance towards nonbelievers and in fact my best friends are nonbelievers I have met in forums. I only have one close friend who is a Baha'i. Moreover, I understand the atheist position, because there is really no proof that God exists.

Given the empirical evidence, I have always held the position that there are three mutually exclusive logical possibilities:

1. God exists and communicates via Messengers, or
2. God exists and does not communicate, or
3. God does not exist

There is no way to prove that any one of those are true, thus I do not assert that any one of them is true.
However I believe that #1 is true.

 

[Trailblazer]

Is that the Hindu, Ancient Egyptian. Aztec, Norse, etc god or just the one you believe in?

Here's your problem with convincing people only your ideas are right. There have been so many different religions that contradict each other someone is conning the believers.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything I believe. All I do is present what "I believe" is true. People can do whatever they want with it because we all have free will to choose.

4,300 religions

There are some 4,300 religions of the world. This is according to Adherents, an independent, non-religiously affiliated organisation that monitors the number and size of the world's religions.

This is without including the ancient world. Religion in the Ancient World

They contradict each other so much they can't all be true.

That is an oversimplification. Have you never heard of degrees of truth? Nothing is so black and white that a religion is either true or false. Most religions have some truth and some religions have more truth than others. The primary reason we see contradictions between religions is because men have misinterpreted, changed and corrupted the religions over time.

So why is there religion? Important question. We have always wanted an edge to life, such as hunting, gathering, having children, getting water, staying safe, war, etc. By inventing a god and telling the people if they do as I tell them (because I know what god wants) he will give you that edge.

You are welcome to your personal opinion as I am to mine. I believe we have religion because God revealed religion via Messengers, and I believe that has been the case throughout human history.

So did leaders, chiefs, kings etc invent gods and religions to maintain power? Answer that one and you find the truth.

Unless you can prove that chiefs, kings etc invented gods and religions to maintain power that is a bald assertion and an argument from ignorance. I learned all these logical fallacies from my atheist friends over the years.

 

[Trailblazer]

Suppose someone designed a system for radio broadcast of messages. Both the transmitter and the receiver radios.

But most of the radios don't pick up the frequency the transmitter broadcasts on. Is the flaw in the radios? The transmitter?

Or whoever designed the system?
Tom

Clearly, the flaw is in the radios.

Atheists simply cannot accept any responsibility for NOT getting the messages so they blame God.
This is drop dead obvious to anyone except those atheists.

God has broadcasted the message through the Messengers....
If atheists do not even turn on the radio and tune it into the right channel then they cannot get the message that has been broadcasted. This is logic 101 stuff.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Whom are you referring to as Avatara? Bahaollah as 'avatara' of Allah?
You mean Bahaollah was Allah in human form like Hindus consider Rama and Krishna?

Yes, this has much written on it now and it is a topic that needs a lot of meditation.

The human form of the Avatar, their person, their life and the Message they give, is all we can know of God, they are the 'Self of God' to us, they are given in a form we can understand. All we can know of God, is only through them. At the same time they are not God in Essence, as they are also created, created of the Holy Spirit, whereas we are created of the human spirit.

Baha'u'llah has said that it is not wrong to see them as the Avatar or God, as long as we do not argue about it and understand the fundamental truth that God is above our knowledge.

So in reality the God we argue about, is a God we can not know, but by knowing the attributes of an Avatar that was sent by God.

So if there was an Avatar in history from the Hindu branch of Faiths that gave a Message from God, I also embrace them as Messengers, the problem being is the records of their life and what they said. Is it what they did and said, or have men written what they want the life and teachings to say?

Much can be said, all the best Aupmanyav

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Ok I'm done talking about this because this is a faith based position that I don't know how you can know is true in comparison to other faith based positions.

I respect your comment because I know you do not understand how I can know; only I can understand that. Other Baha’is can also understand that.

Well until I see it happen I'm not gonna believe it.

I would not expect that you would because you would have no reason to since you are not a Baha’i. I do not think any of us in this generation or for generations to come will see it happen.

Again that's a faith based position and your or your religion's interpretation of what Jesus claimed and I don't know how you can know that's true.

Again, I can understand why you don’t know how I can know. I know not only because I have faith but because I have familiarity with the Baha’i teachings, coupled with my intuition and logic.

Is atheism a respectable position?

I believe it is, since there is no proof that God exists.

Lots of religions claim that their path is the easy path, so it's nothing new under the sun for Bahai's to claim the same thing.

I am not claiming the Baha’i Faith is an easy path, I am saying it is a difficult path. I realize that other religions can make the same claim, and maybe their path is also difficult, but their path would be difficult for other reasons than I stated.

 

[Jos]

I believe it is, since there is no proof that God exists.

So then why criticize atheists for not believing? Aren't they being reasonable?

I am not claiming the Baha’i Faith is an easy path

My mistake, I meant to say it was not an easy path

I realize that other religions can make the same claim, and maybe their path is also difficult, but their path would be difficult for other reasons than I stated.

Well at least you acknowledge that religions other than your own claim to be a difficult path to follow

 

[Trailblazer]

@Trailblazer - do you see how @PAUL MARKHAM simply asserts things that you must feel that he can't, necessarily know for certain? THAT IS EXACTLY HOW YOU SOUND most of the time. Exactly.

Probably the reason I SOUND that way to you is because I have certitude of my beliefs, but if you look at the wording in my posts and compare it to Paul's wording it will become crystal clear that I am not actually asserting anything, I simply believe what I believe. For example, look at this thread that I posted:

What would be evidence that God exists?

My premise is that Messengers of God are the only real evidence that God exists because they are the evidence that God provides and wants us to look at in order to determine that He exists.

Allow me to preface this by saying that nobody can prove that a Messenger received communication from God, since nobody can prove that God exists. As I have been saying in this forum for years, all we have is evidence, and evidence is not the same as proof.

#1 Trailblazer, Sep 6, 2020

Now look at the bald assertions that Paul makes below. He is stating his beliefs/opinions as if they are actually true, and sometimes he even says they are true and that he knows things he cannot possibly know, thus committing the fallacy of argument from ignorance.

Given that the original book Abrahamic religions are based on is wrong on so many things, that this god allowed us, Humans, to exist for so long without a word from him. I know the book is an invention of men and has no message from any god.

#252 PAUL MARKHAM, Today at 6:17 AM

I know there is no god. So no need to worry about me being uncomfortable.

#253 PAUL MARKHAM, Today at 6:20 AM

So did leaders, chiefs, kings etc invent gods and religions to maintain power? Answer that one and you find the truth.

#256 PAUL MARKHAM, Today at 6:52 AM

I happen to agree with you @PAUL MARKHAM - wanted to make sure you were aware of that. And I honestly thank you for giving @Trailblazer a taste of her own medicine.

Of course you agree with Paul, you are both atheists.
Now show me where I EVER asserted that my beliefs are true.

You atheists are all about the evidence, so I want to see the evidence -- posts I have posted saying I know what is true for everyone. Admittedly, I have said that I know my beliefs are true, but I have always qualified that as being only MY personal belief based upon my inner certitude; I have never stated it as a FACT that applies to everyone the way Paul has done!

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Now show me where I EVER asserted that my beliefs are true.

I have never stated it as a FACT that applies to everyone the way Paul has done!

*sigh* *eyeroll* *lose faith in humanity* Please see below:

The one true God is the God of all the major religions even though He has been depicted differently in some of the true religions of God.

...you would need to understand that God is not a material being...

God does not work in the dark, God gives us fair warning of the consequences to our actions

 

[Trailblazer]

Actually, all you have are excuses, because you do not have actual, verifiable evidence to back you up. Many of these writings and texts you're trying to weave together do not mention one another. The Abrahamic faiths are all just copies or thieveries of one another - exactly like happened when the Romans adopted the Greek pantheon of gods and mostly only changed the names.

I never said I could actually prove what I am saying is true; it is a given that these are beliefs, not assertions, but I am not going to preface every sentence with “I believe,” particularly when I am explaining what I believe and that is obvious that is what I am doing. However, if I took the time I could find some verifiable evidence to support what I believe.

Besides this, you keep referencing the "logic" behind this when there simply is none, ESPECIALLY if there is only one true God who is trying to get "a message" out to everyone. The fact that this "message" evolves (as you claim it does) introduces the idea that NOT EVERYONE THROUGHOUT HISTORY GOT THE SAME CHANCE. In other words, God let quite a lot of people down who were never, EVER going to receive the full message in their lifetimes. If God already had the full message, what was stopping Him from delivering? This plan of "message evolution?" Is He that inept?

I think that you have a misunderstanding of progressive revelation from God. I n every age and with every religion the people living IN that age got exactly what they needed for the times in which they were living. For example, Christians living 2000 years ago were not ready to receive the message that Baha’u’llah revealed in the 19th century and that is why it was not delivered 2000 years ago.

Of course God knew what that message would be because God is All-Knowing and as such God has the future all mapped out since the beginning of time. But God never reveals what humans are not ready for, only what they need at the time, and what they will need until the next Messenger comes.

In the New Testament, Jesus said that “many things” would be revealed in the future because the people living 2000 years ago were not yet ready for the many things He had to say.

John 16:12-13 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 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.

Baha’is believe that Baha’u’llah was the Spirit of truth who brought the “many things” that people living 2000 years ago we not yet ready to hear.

Again, Jesus refers to what will happen in the future in the following verses. Baha’is believe that these verses refer to the Christ Spirit that returned in Baha’u’llah, which was the Comforter that Jesus promised to send from the Father. Please note that these are all about what would happen in the future.

John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

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 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

In the end, you have a bunch of disparate information and you are desperately trying to marry it all together - but that is all I see. Desperation. And I don't even know why you are doing it. Because you think it will "help" me? I don't need your help. Honestly. You can stop if that is what you are trying to do. I do not need your help with any of this. Just as you would most certainly claim that you don't need my help with any of it either. There is nothing going wrong with my life that I feel would, in any way, be helped by religion, or belief in God, etc. I am being dead serious. Religion is just garbage as far as I can tell. A bunch of stories people tell themselves and each other because they fear the void they think is out there waiting to swallow them up otherwise. I don't fear that void. It's fine if that's what's there, waiting for me.

No need to get in a huff. I have no ulterior motives; I just answer posts on a forum that are posted to me, one by one. That is what I do. I do not think people need my help. I just respond to posts just as I would answer e-mails from the counties in order to do my job, because I consider it my responsibility to do so. If I post a post and I get a response that warrants an answer, then I respond. I don’t think to myself “gee, let’s see who I can convince today.” Why would I think that, well knowing that both atheists and believers who believe differently from me are never going to change their beliefs?

You share your beliefs about religion and belief in God and I share mine. That is one thing forums are for.

I am sure you don't understand that mindset. It is quite clear that you are one of the ones who just can't accept certain ideas and be content with them. I feel you likely need these fabrications in order to make you feel like there is some "meaning" behind all of it, and that your struggles are not simply in vein. It is a completely terrible way to go about viewing life, honestly. Just awful, and if that is you, then you have my sympathies. And if it isn't a description of you, then simply ignore me.

You really should not speak for what you think I think or believe. Do I speak for what I think you think and believe? It is always best to allow people to speak for themselves and then we find out what is really going on in their heads. We cannot possibly know that from what people SAY about their beliefs or non-beliefs.

Of course I do not understand your mindset as I am not you; but likewise you do not understand MY mindset because you are not me.

From what you have said apparently you look at my beliefs and you see fantasies and fabrications rather than reality, but I see is reality. It is a completely different perspective on life than you have. As a believer, I see the material reality and life on this earth as fleeting and temporary, and as an atheist you see it as all there is. There is no point arguing about which one of us is right; we will both find out someday, or not find out anything if you are right and there is no afterlife.

My life changed 50 years ago when I became a Baha’i and realized that that there was more to life than THIS life. From that time forward I knew that was true, but I kind of got lost in life for many, many years, going to many colleges and acquiring many degrees, acquiring real estate, etc. Then about eight years ago I decided to take God and the Baha’i Faith more seriously, but I had to make up for a lot of lost time. Perhaps that is why I sometimes appear overzealous.

Basically, I am saying that this conversation is over. I don't need the information you think you have. Never have, never will. It's beyond useless to me.

I conclude this by saying that I read all posts paragraph by paragraph so I can stay focused on what the person is saying, so I did not see your parting note before I wrote what I wrote above, but now that I wrote it I am going to leave it as it is, even though I know you have no interest.

I wish you only the best in life and I am glad you are happy with your life and the path you have chosen.

 

[Trailblazer]

*sigh* *eyeroll* *lose faith in humanity* Please see below:

Trailblazer said: Now show me where I EVER asserted that my beliefs are true.

I have never stated it as a FACT that applies to everyone the way Paul has done!

What you quoted was me explaining my beliefs, NOT assertions that my beliefs are true.
As I said in my other post, I am not going to preface everything I say with "I believe."

It is also important to note that this was me explaining my beliefs within the context of a discussion, it was not me making blanket statements about what I believe unsolicited.

 

[Trailblazer]

So then why criticize atheists for not believing? Aren't they being reasonable?

Please show me where I ever criticized atheists for NOT believing in God.

The most I have done is point out WHY I think that atheists do not believe in God, because they refuse to look at Messengers as evidence for God. And that is an incontrovertible fact that can be seen plastered all over this forum.

 

[Trailblazer]

Just saying things are "funny" is the stupidest thing I've ever heard you do. I said "might" prove your B.S. wrong.

FYI I thought it was funny because one verse from the OT that has 57 different translations could not prove that any religion is wrong, not the Baha'i Faith or any other religion. But if you think I am wrong about that, please explain how you think it would be possible to prove a religion is wrong with one verse from the OT.

 

[Jos]

Please show me where I ever criticized atheists for NOT believing in God.

OK maybe you don't criticize them as people for not believing in God but you do criticize their nonbelief and say that they don't like that God uses messengers or that they're close-minded which might be true of some but not all of them. That's a bit besides the point though because you did say earlier that atheists are reasonable for not believing in God because there's no proof God exists, so aren't you being unreasonable for believing in God?

The most I have done is point out WHY I think that atheists do not believe in God, because they refuse to look at Messengers as evidence for God.

They have looked at the evidence, it's just that they don't find it to be convincing and I don't blame them since the evidence is based on circular reasoning among other issues that have already been pointed out.