ecco
Veteran Member
No, Baha'u'llah was just saying that the older religions have been corrupted.
As I said: we can see that's it's just from a couple of guys who were unhappy with Islam.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No, Baha'u'llah was just saying that the older religions have been corrupted.
No, actually I debunked all the stories that use extensive quotes to justify their "authenticity".
I also debunked the prophesies that really aren't aren't prophesies.
Wrong again. His character was attested to by those who WERE NOT Baha'is.Your claims about the "character" of Babullah are just based on the glowing writers of his followers.
You have shown NOTHING. All you have is a personal opinion, which is worth less than a hill of beans.Also, the writings of Babullah, many (most?) of which you admittedly have never read, are incoherent ramblings as I have shown.
That is the biggest joke I have ever heard. The Baha'i Faith has evidence that NO OTHER RELIGION HAS. But I am not going to waste my time pointing those out to you again.Bottom line, Bahai is just another religion with the same kind of proofs that all other religions have - nothing.
Since it is relatively recent, we can see that's it's just from a couple of guys who were unhappy with Islam.
As I said: we can see that's it's just from a couple of guys who were unhappy with Islam.
You are wrong, I did explain it and you are in luck, because I normally save posts like that one in Word documents, so I was able to locate it rather quickly. I am sure you will find something else to complain about, but I do not care. You cannot say I did not offer a LOGICAL EXPLANATION.
ecco said: I asked how, 80 years after the fact, Shogi Effendi could quote word for word from the conversation. Why is this important? If there is no logical way for him to have been able to do that, then a rational person must accept the fact that the writings are fabrications.
Trailblazer said: Did you ever go to college and do research? I did. I have two post graduate degrees so I did a lot of research and i wrote a lot of research papers. So I know what "primary resource material" is.
I got some more answers from Planet Baha'i today that explain a logical way that he could have known word for word what the Grand Vizir and Baha’u’llah said.
Bold was added by me for emphasis.
The question is, "How could Shoghi Effendi have known these things?"
Actually, in Shoghi Effendi's case, the answer is rather simple: like any other author seeking to chronicle historical events, he did his research and relied as much as possible on primary source material.
How Shoghi Effendi knew of a conversation between the Grand Vizir and Baha'u'llah that occurred before he was born is not an important question since it is not crucial to my belief. However, I found out that he knew because his grandfather Abdu'l-Baha told him about it.
Then you attempt to answer the question by quoting Duane - Someone told Shoghi Effendi. When I pointed out the lameness of your response you posted on the Planet Baha'i forum and parroted their response.- his grandfather Abdu'l-Baha told him about it.
Of course, you neither questioned nor explained how the grandfather could have heard and recorded the conversations.
You've heard of The Dawnbreakers, also known as Nabil's Narrative. Nabil-i-A'zam, one of the nineteen apostles of Baha'u'llah, did extensive research and conducted interviews in the course of writing this history of the Babi and early Baha'i Faiths, a work which Shoghi Effendi himself translated into English and published in 1932. A lot of the material in God Passes By is based on The Dawnbreakers.
That is patently untrue. The best that you and your fellow Bahai's could come up with was "someone's grandfather told him". You have not mentioned "Nabil" in any post to me. You have not explained who Nabil is. You have not provided evidence to show that he was there or a rational explanation for how he could have been there.
You are absolutely wrong, and I could prove it if I had a way to search back through old posts as they have on the other forum I post on. Why not just admit you are wrong? It would not kill you.As I noted earlier, I have no recollection of you ever mentioning a Nabil or the dawnbreakers. Maybe it got lost in all the pastes from Gleanings that you like to use to fill up your posts.
Who ever suggested you do that?In any case, I have followed up on your prophecies, on your character references, on your writings and your Gleanings. I'm not about to chase any more of your links.
I am not TRYING to be compelling or convincing. Baha'u'llah wrote that the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone except himself.You have an average run of the mill religion which is barely known to anyone in the world. The "evidences" that you have may be enough to convince you, but overall, they aren't very compelling at all.