Dear
@InvestigateTruth - you seem to have lost the plot entirely. What on earth do natural science and math have to do with anything? Bismarck was a key stabilizing influence within the German Empire from its inception just as Frederick the Great had been in the Kingdom of Prussia. He simply drew a comparison and
it happened to be correct - once his influence was gone the Empire disintegrated. He didn't need science or math to work that out - just ordinary human intuition. And Baha'u'llah was blessed with an intuitive sense of how the future might unfold - but it only works so far ahead and much better with situations you actually know about.
So, You believe he made some observation and comparison with something already had happened, and this one just happened to be similar to what happened before. Ok, so let's see if what Bahaullah had foretold could have been just something that could have been predicted by acquiring knowledge and predicting something that just happened...
Are you considering that when one prediction is made, the possibility that it does not come true, is less, than when a person makes several predictions, for one of them to happen to fail?
Baha'u'llah had intimate knowledge of French involvement in the Crimea through his relationship with French Ambassador's secretary who was Baha'u'lla's Brother-in-Law. From the same source he would have known about the tensions between France and Prussia.
?
Before I even reply to this hypothesis that you came up with, I just have to say, things are not proven in this manner.
Consider that how today, everyone has to sign any document just as a proof that they agreed with its content.
I mean, when you want to prove a hypothesis, you would have to show verifiable evidence. Where is the evidence that Baha'u'llah's intimate knowledge of French involvement in the Crimea was through his relationship with French Ambassador's secretary who was Baha'u'lla's Brother-in-Law?
Supposing that Baha'u'llah's brother in law was French Ambassador's secretary. Now, you have to show evidence that Baha'u'llah had received certain information that caused Him to know the Napoleon III will fall soon. Do you have an evidence for that, or you expect me to just take your words for it? Moreover, how many other people at that time knew Napoleon III will loose? Was not He very powerful at the time Bahaullah predicted His loss?
His comment about the banks of the Rhine "covered with gore" almost certainly refers to the Franco-Prussian conflict that saw the downfall of Napoleon III's empire - but that had already happened when he wrote about it in 1873. It was Abdu'l Baha who later interpreted it as prophetic of additional conflict to face the German Empire. But again by then Germany and her allies were already on a collision course with France, Britain and Russia - geez its all in the history books - and Abdu'l Baha was in Paris for goodness sake - he could hardly have failed to notice the potential for further conflict with Germany at that point.
?
" O banks of the Rhine! We have seen you covered with gore, inasmuch as the swords of retribution were drawn against you; and you shall have another turn. And We hear the lamentations of Berlin, though she be today in conspicuous glory."
How would "you shall have another turn" and "though she be today in conspicuous glory" be interpreted?
How can Bahaullah says 'We hear the lamentations of Berlin' and at the same time He says 'Berlin is in glory today?!'
It is obvious then, when Bahaullah says He hears the lamentations of Berlin, He is talking about a future event that He has been aware of it in the past through a vision. For the same reason when Be says He had seen it covered with gore, this is also a future event that will come to pass.
Er - no but it compares a little more closely with someone who spent several moths in the home of the secretary to the French Ambassador - who just happened to be his brother-in-law. What would have been more remarkable would have been if Baha'u'llah had predicted the famine that killed 10 per cent of the population of Northern China in the 1870s or the fall of the Qing dynasty in 1912 and the rise and fall of the Japanese Empire. Maybe even stretching the limits of his prophetic abilities, perhaps he could have predicted the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 or the end of the British Empire when Hong Kong was handed back to China in 1997. He didn't mention any of these as far as I know. Were China and Japan not among "all the main kingdoms"? Was the rise and fall of communism in Eastern Europe not a significant enough development to merit divine foreknowledge? Baha'u'llah wrote - in imprecise terms - about the Kingdoms he knew about.
I think Bahaullah wrote to the main powers of the time, who were causing the world to go through world wars and had the most effect. But as for your logic, even let's say Bahaullah had written to the King of China or Japan, you could still say why He did not write to the Kings of Africa of various country, and the minister of every city in the world so it may be proven He knew of the fate of all. This does not change the fact that Bahaullah prophesied of the fall of certain ones and it did happen. The hypothesis that in each case He was receiving information to know they fall soon, is also virtually impossible. I already gave a hint, that He was imprisoned and exiled in a confined location. You should read the history of the days when Bahaullah was imprisoned in Turkey and the situation He went through when He was exiled and imprisoned in Akka, so you may be sure, no such information was given to Him by anyone.
And you had one good observation before when you said King of Berlin did not fall that soon, but he lived till old age and even his son after him became next king.
What It seems to me is, in certain Tablets, Bahaullah wrote that 'It will happen Soon' and in certain Tablets He did not say it will happen soon.
For example in 1869, Bahá'u'lláh compares the Sultan and his Prime Minister
`Alí Páshá to
Nimrod and
Pharaoh who rose up against
Abraham and
Moses and writes that they will lose power:
Soon will We dismiss the one who was like unto him [`Alí Páshá], and will lay hold on their Chief who ruleth the land [the Sultan]...
[8]
Sultan
`Abdu'l-`Azíz was deposed on May 30, 1876 and a fortnight later he was found dead in the palace where he had been confined, and trustworthy medical evidence attributed his death to
suicide although many people believed he was murdered by a conspiracy.
Bahá'í prophecies - Wikipedia
But when you look at for example Tablet to the King of Berlin, He does not say ' Soon', but He rather says He will be patient with him.
Bahaullah wrote many Tablets to the kings, and you can examine if what I say is consistent.
OK - so please provide references to primary source materials to establish this - shouldn't be difficult if there were "many" of them
I will if I get some time, will dig. But you should be able to find it online I think if you want to search.
Here is some clues for the sources:
During the period of German successes in the Great War of 1914-1918, and especially during the last great German offensive in the spring of 1918, this well-known prophecy was extensively quoted by the opponents of the Bahá'í Faith in Persia, in order to discredit Bahá'u'lláh; but when the forward sweep of the victorious Germans was suddenly transformed into crushing, overwhelming disaster, the efforts of these enemies of the Bahá'í Cause recoiled on themselves, and the notoriety which they had given to the prophecy became a powerful
means of enhancing the reputation of Bahá'u'lláh.
The Project Gutenberg EBook of Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era by J.E. Esslemont
And, whilst you're at it, since you have so far mentioned only France, Germany, Russia, Britain and - if I recall correctly, the demise of Ali Pasha and the downfall of Abdul Aziz (the Ottoman Sultan in the 1870s), can you please provide references to materials that show that Baha'u'llah made prophetic references in regard to any others of the "main Kingdoms" - including China and Japan, whose Kingdoms fell and perhaps the Kingdom of the Netherlands that remains to this day, had (like Britain) recently abolished slavery in its Empire when Baha'u'llah was writing his letters and had instituted parliamentary democracy in 1848. If he mentioned any of these specifically then I guess you have a case - otherwise his "knowledge" of world events would certainly seem to have been limited to a Persian-centric view with a dash of French diplomatic input - not too far removed from his natural life, wouldn't you say?
You can find them here.
Bahá'í prophecies - Wikipedia
What is noteworthy is that when Mirza Abul'fazl who was a well learned scholar happened to see two tablets of Bahaullah containing prophecies of the fall of Ottoman rulers, he considered it so impossible that he said if such things indeed come to pass, he believes in Bahaullah, and when it came to pass this Muslim scholar became a Baha'i. Now, if predicting such things were as easy and so expected, why would it cause a Muslim scholar who was well familiar of the trends of the time, all the sudden believe a new Messenger of God had come after Muhammad the Seal of Prophets!?
