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

[Nakosis]

We know that the gist of the message got through because from that religions were born.

There's Hinduism, Paganism, Wicca, Scientology. These are religions that were born. Are we to accept any religion which comes into existence as originating from a message from God?

It was prophesied, by the Jewish prophets, and by Jesus.

In which case for Jesus at least, I have to refer you to my previous post. Jesus wrote down no prophecies.

No, because the Method God uses cannot be flawed since God is infallible.
Humans however can be flawed because humans are fallible.
That means that any failures had to be on the part of humans, not God or the Messengers.

These flawed humans are all we have. Doesn't matter if God is infallible. It's not God we are relying on. We are relying on claims made by messengers. Or with Jesus and Mohammad, claims made for them by others. We are not even 3rd party here. God is expecting his message gets reliably communicated to a 4th party. God may be infallible but his method of communicating his message is not

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

There's Hinduism, Paganism, Wicca, Scientology. These are religions that were born. Are we to accept any religion which comes into existence as originating from a message from God?



In which case for Jesus at least, I have to refer you to my previous post. Jesus wrote down no prophecies.



These flawed humans are all we have. Doesn't matter if God is infallible. It's not God we are relying on. We are relying on claims made by messengers. Or with Jesus and Mohammad, claims made for them by others. We are not even 3rd party here. God is expecting his message gets reliably communicated to a 4th party. God may be infallible but his method of communicating his message is not

To keep repeating the same thing and expecting a different result is .................

The messages aren't working, otherwise, there's no point in sending more.

Or they're all fakes.

 

[Nakosis]

To keep repeating the same thing and expecting a different result is .................

The messages aren't working, otherwise, there's no point in sending more.

Or they're all fakes.

I believe these messengers were sincere. However, I also believe the subconscious mind is capable of tricking folks not believing they are in communication with God. Moses was accepted through enforcement by the Hebrew. Jesus was accepted through enforcement by the Romans. Mohammad was accepted through enforcement by the Muslims. No one around to enforce acceptance of Bahá’u’lláh.

I can give you a message from God as well. If I could get some nation to enforce my acceptance as a prophet of God, I might get a religion started as well.

 

[Trailblazer]

There's Hinduism, Paganism, Wicca, Scientology. These are religions that were born. Are we to accept any religion which comes into existence as originating from a message from God?

No, only those religions that were revealed by a Messenger of God. That excludes Wicca and Scientology.

In which case for Jesus at least, I have to refer you to my previous post. Jesus wrote down no prophecies.

No, however the prophecies for the return of Christ were written by the gospel authors.

These flawed humans are all we have. Doesn't matter if God is infallible. It's not God we are relying on. We are relying on claims made by messengers. Or with Jesus and Mohammad, claims made for them by others. We are not even 3rd party here. God is expecting his message gets reliably communicated to a 4th party. God may be infallible but his method of communicating his message is not

What happened in the past is in the past as we now have a Messenger who wrote His own scriptures.
But even in the past, when there was only 3rd and 4th party communication, the essential messages got through. Regarding what was misinterpreted and misunderstood in older scriptures, we now have the explanations and clarifications of what was important for us to understand, through the Baha'i Writings.

 

[Nakosis]

No, only those religions that were revealed by a Messenger of God. That excludes Wicca and Scientology.

Seems kind of arbitrary.

No, however the prophecies for the return of Christ were written by the gospel authors.

3rd party. Maybe not to you, but to me, being the 4th person down the line is not a reliable position to be in.

What happened in the past is in the past as we now have a Messenger who wrote His own scriptures.
But even in the past, when there was only 3rd and 4th party communication, the essential messages got through. Regarding what was misinterpreted and misunderstood in older scriptures, we now have the explanations and clarifications of what was important for us to understand, through the Baha'i Writings.

I'm tempted to go through and correct, at least update Bahá’u’lláh message.

 

[Trailblazer]

Seems kind of arbitrary.

There has to be a standard. Every religion that calls itself a religion is not from God, that is the standard.

3rd party. Maybe not to you, but to me, being the 4th person down the line is not a reliable position to be in.

I am the same distance down the line as you are. We have what we have whether it is reliable or not.

I'm tempted to go through and correct, at least update Bahá’u’lláh message.

Go on ahead.

 

[Nakosis]

There has to be a standard. Every religion that calls itself a religion is not from God, that is the standard.

I am the same distance down the line as you are. We have what we have whether it is reliable or not.

Go on ahead.

Do you ever hear from God yourself?

 

[Trailblazer]

Do you ever hear from God yourself?

No, because God does not speak to ordinary humans. God only speaks to His Messengers.

 

[Nakosis]

No, because God does not speak to ordinary humans. God only speaks to His Messengers.

Ok, so you believe we have to rely 100% on the messengers.
Not to say you are right or wrong but there are folks who say otherwise.

 

[Trailblazer]

Ok, so you believe we have to rely 100% on the messengers.
Not to say you are right or wrong but there are folks who say otherwise.

Yes, that is what I believe. We have to rely upon Messengers of we want to know anything about God or know God's message for us. I will refrain from saying what I believe about people who believe God communicates to them directly.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm not even going to bother commenting other than. He says he's the messenger and therefore he is.

That is absurd. I have told you many times that the claim to be a Messenger does not prove anything.

 

[Trailblazer]

But he keeps sending messengers. 10,000 of them so far and as you see from this list no easing up on messengers. List of religious movements that began in the United States - Wikipedia

Why send any if the messages are getting through and not flawed?

No, those are either sects of Christianity or Judaism or they are cults. They have no new Messenger or message from God.

 

[CG Didymus]

I Googled it, but it really does not matter because there is no verse in the NT wherein Jesus promised to return and Jesus said His work was finished here and He was no more in the world. Therefore Revelations is not about the same man Jesus returning.

Yes, it doesn't matter to you, because anything that even implies Jesus is coming back the Christians take as proof and Baha'is can always say the "spirit" of Christ, not Jesus the person is coming back. And I think it does imply that he is coming back. But then when we start talking about how much we really believe any of the NT, it pretty much don't mean much.

 

[CG Didymus]

It will never sound the same to everyone, but it does not matter what it sounds like, it only matters what is true.

And that leaves us with an invisible God that nobody can prove. So when a story says the monkey captain of an army jumped from India to Sri Lanka to save Rama's wife then I'd say it not only sounds like myth but probably is myth. Here's a link to the story...

Ravana kidnapped Sita, disguising himself as a mendicant, while Rama was away fetching a golden deer to please her. Some versions of the Ramayana describe Sita taking refuge with the fire-god Agni, while Maya Sita, her illusionary double, is kidnapped by the demon-king.​

But the usual one that we have to deal with is Jesus... A virgin birth, walked on water, healed the sick and raised the dead and he himself rose from the dead and will come back and resurrected his dead followers, and those that are still alive will meet him in the air. Yup, sounds mythical to me. But, the NT says that is what happened, And, Christians say it is the inerrant, literal word of God.

So, again, if the stories are fictional, but believed as true, and we get Christians swearing that all this really happened and is true, then there is something wrong. That message is screwed up. If it is true, that's different. But who believes any of it really happened? And once a person gets to that point, why believe the God of those stories is real? And, to tie it back in to this thread, if by chance that God really is real, then his methods are whacked out, or very, very flawed.

 

[CG Didymus]

In case I never told you, the Name Baha'u'llah is in the Book of Revelation and there are Bibles that show this. Baha'u'llah was the Translation found in Bibles prior to 1870 until they were removed from circulation.

Bibles of 1833 and 1858 clearly showing BAHÁ'U'LLÁH IN REVELATION 21:23.

View attachment 44665


View attachment 44666

There are a whole bunch of Hebrew names and Arabic names that have "God" in them. That doesn't make the person who was given that name a messenger. By taking on a title is similar. There's a guy calling himself Maitreya. Is he the promised return of Buddha? No, we aren't going to take his word for it. We're going to question it and check to see if he's telling the truth. Some of us have some questions about the validity of the claims the Baha'i Faith makes. So far, the prophecies are of no help. We have his writings, which some of us aren't all the impressed with, other than the volume of things he wrote.

Oh, before I forget, in one of the other threads you were asked, I think it was about the Book of Laws, if you read it and follow the laws in it. To me, that's important. If Baha'is themselves actually follow the laws and teachings. 'Cause everybody knows that so many "religious" people don't follow their religious laws and moral codes all that much. And when someone is breaking some of the laws of a religion, even Baha'is sometimes say, "Well, it's between them and God." Which to me means that the laws aren't going to be enforced. They are more like "suggestions". Anyway, that's all for today. I'm still a couple pages behind.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, it doesn't matter to you, because anything that even implies Jesus is coming back the Christians take as proof and Baha'is can always say the "spirit" of Christ, not Jesus the person is coming back. And I think it does imply that he is coming back. But then when we start talking about how much we really believe any of the NT, it pretty much don't mean much.

Jesus the same person cannot ever come back unless (a) He rose from the dead and (b) is still alive in the same body in heaven. Do you believe that? But even if you believe that it won't help because Jesus never promised to come back and He said His work was finished here and He was no more in the world. There are no verses in the NT where Jesus says He is coming back to earth, not even one.

You really should get out more. I don't think you have been following any of the dialogues I have had with Christians on this forum. Although I not been having many lately I posted one post today to nPeace explaining what I had said to Brian2 a few days ago. I just posted it again to MeandFlower on the Questions for Baha'is thread:

Jesus was the Son of man, and Baha'u'llah was the return of the Son of man who brought the Holy Spirit. Baha'u'llah was also the return of Christ, because He was the Comforter that Jesus promised to send from the Father. I explained that to Brian2 a few days ago.

Brian2 said:If Jesus was in heaven when Baha'u'llah was on earth then Jesus spirit was in heaven then.

Trailblazer said: There is the soul and the spirit and the Holy Spirit.

The words soul and spirit mean the same thing because the soul is the human spirit; but the Holy Spirit is different, it is the Bounty of God.

So the soul (spirit) of Jesus ascended to heaven (as per Acts 1:9) and it has remained in heaven ever since.

Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

Jesus was a Comforter because He brought the Holy Spirit to humanity.

When Jesus ascended to heaven, He sent another Comforter, as He had promised to do.

Jesus sent the Comforter who brought the Holy Spirit to humanity, again.

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 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.

Baha'u'llah was the Comforter who brought the Holy Spirit that Jesus promised to send from the Father, since Jesus was with the Father in heaven. That is why we have this verse:

Acts 2:17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
*********************************
There is no basis to believe that Jesus was referring to Himself as the Son of man who would return to earth in the Son of man verses, and there is also no basis for believing that the same man Jesus would ever return to earth, as I explained in this thread I started a while ago:

Who is the Son of man who will come in the clouds of heaven?

 

[Trailblazer]

But who believes any of it really happened? And once a person gets to that point, why believe the God of those stories is real?

The question is, why do you need to believe the stories in order to believe in God?
Why not put the Bible on the shelf where it belongs? It was revealed for another age and that age is over.

 

[Trailblazer]

Some of us have some questions about the validity of the claims the Baha'i Faith makes. So far, the prophecies are of no help. We have his writings, which some of us aren't all the impressed with, other than the volume of things he wrote.

I received something you might like in my e-mail today, a new prophecy I had never seen.

https://bahaiteachings.org/prophet-amos-foretold-bahaullahs-coming

 

[Trailblazer]

Oh, before I forget, in one of the other threads you were asked, I think it was about the Book of Laws, if you read it and follow the laws in it. To me, that's important. If Baha'is themselves actually follow the laws and teachings.

Whether Baha'is follow the Laws or not has nothing to do with whether Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God or not.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Ok, so you believe we have to rely 100% on the messengers.
Not to say you are right or wrong but there are folks who say otherwise.

And he will pick the messengers we believe, with no proof to back up anything.