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

[ppp]

Interesting, that's why prophecy is so messy and something that's so divisive. It doesn't make sense why an all powerful being would on something so problematic

There is nothing that requires an all-powerful being not be a jerk.

 

[Trailblazer]

Those things do not just "build" on one another. They are, in some cases, so different that it should boggle the mind if what you're saying it accepted as "true." Just because your graphic is made from nice colors doesn't make it magically explain a darn thing.

Yes, they are very different in some cases, but there is a logical explanation for that, there is always an explanation.

No, they do not always BUILD on one another, but there is a spiritual progression throughout history. That means that humanity has been evolving spiritually and will continue to do so. Just as science is continually evolving to meet our material needs, religion is continually evolving in order to meet our spiritual needs.

History as Spiritual Evolution

The graphic was an oversimplification of a complex issue to try to get the main point across, that there are many Messengers that all come from the same God. From each one of those Messengers a religion is established. All the Messengers who ever came to earth are not shown on the graphic, but those are the primary ones.

The other problem - things like the greek (and then roman) pantheon of gods, and norse understanding of who and what the gods were does not appear in your timeline. Why is that, do you think?

There is a very simple answer to that. There is only one true God; there is no pantheon of Gods and the norse understanding was incorrect. 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. There is an explanation for that too.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes interpretation is subjective but I would think that the author of something would at least have some sort of authority on how to interpret what they've written and thus, I think the Jewish interpretation would be the correct one.

But where is the author? We do not even know who the authors of the OT were, but that is a moot point, because those authors gave nobody any authority to interpret the scriptures. Moses gave nobody any authority to interpret the OT either, so there is no reason to think the Jews can interpret it any better than anyone else.

Why would He want that? Doesn't he want everyone to believe in Him and have a relationship with Him?

Yes, God would want that but God is realistic enough to realize it is not possible for everyone to believe the same way. It would only be possible if everyone got on the same page. That is one reason why God sent Baha'u'llah, but since only a few people have recognized Him to date, few people are on the same page.[/QUOTE]

 

[Trailblazer]

There is nothing that requires an all-powerful being not be a jerk.

Only logic.

 

[Jos]

But where is the author? We do not even know who the authors of the OT were, but that is a moot point, because those authors gave nobody any authority to interpret the scriptures. Moses gave nobody any authority to interpret the OT either, so there is no reason to think the Jews can interpret it any better than anyone else.

Well if it's all subjective and no one has any authority to interpret the scriptures, then that means that there's no right or wrong answer as to how they should be interpreted, which makes all scriptural interpretations pretty meaningless.

Yes, God would want that but God is realistic enough to realize it is not possible for everyone to believe the same way. It would only be possible if everyone got on the same page. That is one reason why God sent Baha'u'llah, but since only a few people have recognized Him to date, few people are on the same page

God's supposed way of doing things with the Messengers makes no sense, given all He knows about human nature, so once again, it's completely unreasonable for God to send Messengers knowing that people would be too fallible to recognize them. It's completely illogical for a supremely intelligent being to do something like that.

 

[ppp]

Only logic.

Just saying the word "logic" is not using logic. Form is not substance.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well if it's all subjective and no one has any authority to interpret the scriptures, then that means that there's no right or wrong answer as to how they should be interpreted, which makes all scriptural interpretations pretty meaningless.

That may well be true concerning the Bible, although as a Baha'i, I believe that whatever interpretations if Bible verses that were made by Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah are authoritative and thus accurate.

God's supposed way of doing things with the Messengers makes no sense, given all He knows about human nature, so once again, it's completely unreasonable for God to send Messengers knowing that people would be too fallible to recognize them. It's completely illogical for a supremely intelligent do something like that.

God sent Messengers knowing that some people would recognize them in the beginning, enough to get the ball rolling, and that more people would recognize the Messenger as time went on. That is exactly what has happened.

Whenever a "new" Messenger of God appears, He is the narrow gate by which we can attain eternal life. That is why Jesus said…

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

There are many reasons why only a few people recognize the new Messenger when He appears on earth. The main reason is because most people are steeped in religious tradition or attached to what they already believe. Secondly, if they do not have a religion, most people are suspicious of the new religion and the new Messenger. Thirdly, if they are atheists they do not like the idea of Messengers of God or they think they are all phonies. You are a case in point.

It is difficult to get through the narrow gate because one has to be willing to give up all their preconceived ideas, have an open mind, and think for themselves. Most people do not normally embark upon such a journey. They go through the wide gate, the easy one to get through – their own religious tradition or their own preconceived ideas about God or no god. They follow the broad road that is easiest for them to travel.

 

[Trailblazer]

Just saying the word "logic" is not using logic. Form is not substance.

I was not attempting to use logic to prove anything.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Which passage? I posted more than one. Do you mean this one?

I mean the one you and I have been talking about this whole time:

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p, 284

What tactics? When did I ever say that is all I have?

Not your tactics; Baha'u'llah's.

I can say definitely He was not a con artist and I could explain why, but that would take some time.

And it's time I'm not willing to give. Baha'u'llah doesn't pass my "smell test," so I'm not willing to invest time to see whether he's legitimate or not.

Based on the information I have to date, I see looking into Baha'u'llah as less of a priority than, say, looking into those statues of Ganesh that supposedly drank milk. You'll just have to wait your turn.

 

[Trailblazer]

I mean the one you and I have been talking about this whole time:

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p, 284

9-10ths_Penguin said: Right: and that's why that passage you quoted is consistent with Baha'u'llah being a con artist.

In that passage, Baha'u'llah was simply describing God and how God operates. I cannot see how that is consistent with Baha'u'llah being a con artist.

I already know why you thought that but it makes no sense that Baha'u'llah would do what He did for a God He did not believe existed, and say what He said about a God He did not believe existed -- if He was a con artist. We are talking about 15,000 Tablets that He wrote. That is just too bizarre that a con artist would spend time doing all that for a con job, so I suggest you try to come up with a more logical explanation as to what He did and why He did it.

Moreover, con artists always get some personal gain, and Baha'u'llah only made personal sacrifices.

If God does not exist, you are going to have some explaining to do as to how Baha'u'llah did what He did at all. For example, in the annals of Baha'i history we have this account:

“So prolific was this period, that during the first two years after His return from His retirement, according to the testimony of Nabíl, who was at that time living in Baghdád, the unrecorded verses that streamed from His lips averaged, in a single day and night, the equivalent of the Qur’án! As to those verses which He either dictated or wrote Himself, their number was no less remarkable than either the wealth of material they contained, or the diversity of subjects to which they referred...... Had Bahá’u’lláh no other claim to greatness, this were sufficient, in the eyes of the world and its people, that He produced such verses as have streamed this day from His pen.” God Passes By, pp. 137-138

Not your tactics; Baha'u'llah's.

Sneaky fella, that Baha'u'llah.

And it's time I'm not willing to give. Baha'u'llah doesn't pass my "smell test," so I'm not willing to invest time to see whether he's legitimate or not.

Based on the information I have to date, I see looking into Baha'u'llah as less of a priority than, say, looking into those statues of Ganesh that supposedly drank milk. You'll just have to wait your turn.

I have no idea what information you have to date, but I have no reason to give you any more information unless you ask for it.

 

[Jos]

That may well be true concerning the Bible, although as a Baha'i, I believe that whatever interpretations if Bible verses that were made by Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah are authoritative and thus accurate.

Yeah but that's a faith based position which I don't think you can objectively justify. Unless it doesn't matter to you and you're one of those "truth is subjective" people who believe that individual subjective experience would make something true for you but not for others.

God sent Messengers knowing that some people would recognize them in the beginning, enough to get the ball rolling, and that more people would recognize the Messenger as time went on. That is exactly what has happened.

Sure doesn't seem like that's gonna happen especially given that Islam is quickly becoming the world's most followed religion and that most people are deeply steeped in their religious convictions just as you admitted later in your post.

Whenever a "new" Messenger of God appears, He is the narrow gate by which we can attain eternal life. That is why Jesus said…

So you can't achieve salvation through the previous ones?

Thirdly, if they are atheists they do not like the idea of Messengers of God or they think they are all phonies. You are a case in point.

I'm actually not an atheist, I'm more agnostic, as I'm not sure what I believe or even what to believe

It is difficult to get through the narrow gate because one has to be willing to give up all their preconceived ideas, have an open mind, and think for themselves. Most people do not normally embark upon such a journey. They go through the wide gate, the easy one to get through – their own religious tradition or their own preconceived ideas about God or no god. They follow the broad road that is easiest for them to travel.

Other people of faith can say that about you. And many people out would claim to have been open-minded and to have given up their preconceived notions about God but it ultimately led them to another religion or no religion.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

9-10ths_Penguin said: Right: and that's why that passage you quoted is consistent with Baha'u'llah being a con artist.

In that passage, Baha'u'llah was simply describing God and how God operates. I cannot see how that is consistent with Baha'u'llah being a con artist.

Yes, you can... or at least you could see it a few posts ago:

You disagree with the idea that a con artist would try to get away with his scam?

No, I do not disagree with that.

Put yourself in the shoes of a con artist. You've created a false religion that says that there's a god that answers prayers. Knowing that your made-up god won't actually answer any prayers at all, which would you do?

1. Tell your followers that God answers prayers consistently.
2. Tell your followers that God does what he wants, so he sometimes doesn't answer prayers (or "answers them with 'not yet,'" or "answers them in unexpected ways").

Which option would be best to avoid your scam being discovered?

Option #2.

I have no idea what information you have to date, but I have no reason to give you any more information unless you ask for it.

Well, that's a relief.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yeah but that's a faith based position which I don't think you can objectively justify. Unless it doesn't matter to you and you're one of those "truth is subjective" people who believe that individual subjective experience would make something true for you but not for others.

It is based upon the Covenant of Baha’u’llah, so if one believes in Baha’u’llah they believe that any interpretations of scriptures made by Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah are authoritative and thus accurate.

Sure doesn't seem like that's gonna happen especially given that Islam is quickly becoming the world's most followed religion and that most people are deeply steeped in their religious convictions just as you admitted later in your post.

I do not expect it to come soon, but I expect it to happen eventually, based upon what Baha’u’llah wrote. In the following passage “His Cause” means the Cause if Baha’u’llah, the Baha’i Faith.

“Warn and acquaint the people, O Servant, with the things We have sent down unto Thee, and let the fear of no one dismay Thee, and be Thou not of them that waver. The day is approaching when God will have exalted His Cause and magnified His testimony in the eyes of all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 248

So you can't achieve salvation through the previous ones?

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Baha’is do not believe in salvation as Christians do given there is nothing to be saved from, since we do not believe in original sin Jesus knew nothing of original sin, that is a Christian doctrine. Moreover, Jesus did not refer to salvation but rather referred to eternal life, and He was not referring to physical life of the body, and Jesus was referring a quality of life, loving God and being close to God. Eternal life is a state of the soul that is near to God. That said, the only way we can get near to God is through His Manifestation (Messenger), and since Baha’u’llah was the Messenger of God for this age, that is the closest we can get to God, but that does not mean we cannot get close to God at all through any of the previous Messengers.

I'm actually not an atheist, I'm more agnostic, as I'm not sure what I believe or even what to believe.

That is good to know. Agnosticism is a respectable position.

Other people of faith can say that about you. And many people out would claim to have been open-minded and to have given up their preconceived notions about God but it ultimately led them to another religion or no religion.

They could say that they gave up all their preconceived ideas, had an open mind, and thought for themselves and it led elsewhere, but wherever it led I cannot think of another major religion like the Baha’i Faith, which is not an easy road to travel, nor is the gate wide, given few have entered through it.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, you can... or at least you could see it a few posts ago:

I can see why you think that is consistent with Baha'u'llah being a con artist, but I do not think that is consistent with Baha'u'llah being a con artist.

Well, that's a relief.

Kind of a relief for me too because I am being bombarded with posts and the storm has yet to let up, kind of like the weather here, our first fall storm. I forgot to bring my bike under cover and left my radio on it, so it is anyone's best guess of my wet radio will still work after it dries out
But if only that was my biggest problem in life I'd be all set.

 

[Trailblazer]

Are you sure the KJV has translated the word for "he" correctly? Different translations have "they" or "People", including the New King James. Plus, I looked up maps of ancient Assyria and I don't think it went as far east as where Teheran is located.

Thanks for the translations of the verse, but you might recall that we had a discussion about this verse about three months ago and we agreed that the verse needs to be read in context. I save many of my longer posts in Word documents and I also save all of my posts that are informational, and I know right where to find them, so here is what you said and how I responded.

All we're really using is verse 12, though. What is verse 13 talking about, and what is the rest of the chapter talking about? Is it all a Messianic prophecy? If it's only verse 12, then it's hard for me to accept one verse taken out of context, so, hopefully, you can tie in the rest of the chapter.

Okay, I will try to tie it in…

Micah 7 King James Version (KJV)

7 Woe is me! for I am as when they have gathered the summer fruits, as the grapegleanings of the vintage: there is no cluster to eat: my soul desired the firstripe fruit.

2 The good man is perished out of the earth: and there is none upright among men: they all lie in wait for blood; they hunt every man his brother with a net.

3 That they may do evil with both hands earnestly, the prince asketh, and the judge asketh for a reward; and the great man, he uttereth his mischievous desire: so they wrap it up.

4 The best of them is as a brier: the most upright is sharper than a thorn hedge: the day of thy watchmen and thy visitation cometh; now shall be their perplexity.

5 Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide: keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lieth in thy bosom.

6 For the son dishonoureth the father, the daughter riseth up against her mother, the daughter in law against her mother in law; a man's enemies are the men of his own house.

I think that the gist of verses 1-6 is summarized in verse 2 -- The good man is perished out of the earth: and there is none upright among men – and verses 1-6 are a lead-in to the verses that come after that.

7 Therefore I will look unto the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation: my God will hear me.

8 Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy: when I fall, I shall arise; when I sit in darkness, the Lord shall be a light unto me.

9 I will bear the indignation of the Lord, because I have sinned against him, until he plead my cause, and execute judgment for me: he will bring me forth to the light, and I shall behold his righteousness.

10 Then she that is mine enemy shall see it, and shame shall cover her which said unto me, Where is the Lord thy God? mine eyes shall behold her: now shall she be trodden down as the mire of the streets.

Then, in verses 7-10, he says he will look to the Lord, because man has failed (which he described in verses 1-6).

7 Therefore I will look unto the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation: my God will hear me.

Verse 7 is a lead-in to verses 11-20, which are about the Lord, the Lord of Hosts who will come in the Person of the Messiah. Micah describes what will happen in that day. All these things happened in the days of Baha’u’llah.

11 In the day that thy walls are to be built, in that day shall the decree be far removed.

The decree was removed in 1844:

Edict of Toleration 1844

An edict of toleration is a declaration, made by a government or ruler and states, that members of a given religionwill not be persecuted for engaging in their religious practices and traditions. The edict implies tacit acceptance of the religion rather than its endorsement by the ruling power.

Edict of toleration - Wikipedia

Verse 12 describes where the Messiah will come from and go to:

12 In that day also he shall come even to thee from Assyria, and from the fortified cities, and from the fortress even to the river, and from sea to sea, and from mountain to mountain.

Verses 13-20 describe what the land would look like and what the Messiah would do.

13 Notwithstanding the land shall be desolate because of them that dwell therein, for the fruit of their doings.

14 Feed thy people with thy rod, the flock of thine heritage, which dwell solitarily in the wood, in the midst of Carmel: let them feed in Bashan and Gilead, as in the days of old.

15 According to the days of thy coming out of the land of Egypt will I shew unto him marvellous things.

16 The nations shall see and be confounded at all their might: they shall lay their hand upon their mouth, their ears shall be deaf.

17 They shall lick the dust like a serpent, they shall move out of their holes like worms of the earth: they shall be afraid of the Lord our God, and shall fear because of thee.

18 Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? heretaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy.

19 He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea.

20 Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.

All of this can be tied in with what William Sears wrote in his book Thief in the Night.

Sears listed many things the Messiah would do but I am clipping out only the parts that pertain to Micah 7. In the book, Sears explained exactly how Baha’u’llah fulfilled these prophecies.

1. He would come from Assyria.
2. He would come from the fortified cities.
3. He would come from a fortress to a river.
4. He would come from sea to sea.
5. He would come from mountain to mountain.
6. The land to which he came would be desolate.
7. He would feed his flock in the midst of Mount Carmel.
8. He would work his wonders for a period equal to the days which the Jews spent coming out of Egypt.

Thief in the Night, p. 122

Now that I am discussing the prophecies of Micah, here are a few more that were fulfilled. Sears continues on…..

Frankly, I felt that a fulfillment of these prophecies would be sufficient by itself to establish the authenticity of the Messiah, for in addition to these eight prophesies, Bahá’u’lláh had also fulfilled Micah’s prophesies that the Messiah must:

1. Come as a Messenger of God and tread upon the high places of the earth.
2. Appear in the day when the children of Israel would be gathered into their own land.
3. Establish his house in the mountain.
4. Draw the people to it in a flow of love.
5. Send forth His love from that mountain.
6. Go to Babylon.
7. Withdraw from the city.
8. Dwell in the wilderness and the field.
9. Give birth in Babylon that would redeem the children of Israel.

Thief in the Night, pp. 122-123

Even if the Bible prophecies were the ONLY proof of who Baha’u’llah was, that would be enough for me, if I believed in the Bible. I do believe in the Bible so they are ample proof for me. As I said to a Christian on another thread yesterday:

I am not sure what you would consider trustworthy. I was never a Christian so my basis for belief in Baha’u’llah was the same as your basis for believing in Jesus -- His Person, His life and His mission, and the scriptures that He wrote. If I was a Christian, my basis for believing there was another Prophet/Messenger who would come after Jesus would be the promises Jesus made and what is in the OT about the Messiah to come. I would want to know if Baha’u’llah fulfilled Jesus’ promises and the OT prophecies.

The Bible prophecies and how they were fulfilled by Baha’u’llah are all outlined in this book that can be read online at your leisure: William Sears, Thief in the Night

 

[CG Didymus]

Only that they do not consider Jesus as God / Son of God, do not believe in immaculate conception of Mary, they do not believe in Jesus' resurrection, and for them the gate is not controlled by Jesus but by Bahaollah, a 19th Century uneducated Iranian preacher. Bahaollah prays to his Allah to punish those who do not agree with him.

Next she'll say she understands and believe in Hinduism.

 

[CG Didymus]

If only those who want to believe believe and the rest don't what does that say about this god?

To me, it says he isn't there or doesn't care. As inventing a religion or discovering a new version of it isn't beyond the capabilities of people we must look at the hard evidence. Where is it?

Not in evolution because that proves no god we know of had a hand in evolution.

So are we Humans just a 500 million to one freak of the universe? That you have more evidence than you do any god.

But I will ask again what's the downside of not believing?

Unlike the Judeo/Christian God that created things instantly, the Baha'i God used evolution. I wonder what his purpose was for the dinosaurs? He just let them go extinct? Nice guy.

 

[Trailblazer]

Next she'll say she understands and believe in Hinduism.

Nope, that is out of my league.

 

[Trailblazer]

I wonder what his purpose was for the dinosaurs? He just let them go extinct?

And if He hadn't where would they be living now? Humans cannot even manage the animal species that are left on this planet now and they are going extinct without God's help.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Next she'll say she understands and believe in Hinduism.

It would be a stement that would not be incorrect, in a given frame of reference, as a Baha'i accepts that there is no destinction between the Messengers.

They all teach the same Spiritual foundation truths, suited to the age.

"... The Bearers of the Trust of God are made manifest unto the peoples of the earth as the Exponents of a new Cause and the Revealers of a new Message. Inasmuch as these Birds of the celestial Throne are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God, and as they all arise to proclaim His irresistible Faith, they, therefore, are regarded as one soul and the same person. For they all drink from the one Cup of the love of God, and all partake of the fruit of the same Tree of Oneness..... Even as He hath revealed: “No distinction do We make between any of His Messengers.” For they, one and all, summon the people of the earth to acknowledge the unity of God, and herald unto them the Kawthar of an infinite grace and bounty. They are all invested with the robe of prophethood, and are honored with the mantle of glory.... "

Regards Tony