Loved ones in hell - take 2.

[Tiberius]

Beliefs by definition are not opinions, they are beliefs. Get a dictionary.

Belief: an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof. "his belief in extraterrestrial life"

Opinion: a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. "that, in my opinion, is right"​

Both describe a viewpoint that is held without needing evidence or knowledge or proof.

Also, from the first source:

Belief: something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion. "we're prepared to fight for our beliefs"​

Not unless I know what you want me to demonstrate.

You seem to have difficulty following the discussion. Is it that hard for you to click on the little up arrow next to your name in the posts where I quote you? That way you can see the posting that is being quoted, and you can keep going back to refresh yourself on what we have been discussing. It's a handy trick, I hope you'll make use of it in the future.

In any case, I would like you to show me how any claim of the supernatural makes sense.

 

[Tiberius]

All we have are words and we have to interpret them to mean something. Otherwise the words are pointless.
You can always use that as an excuse as to why a prophecy has not been fulfilled. Been there, done that, seen the movie.

Prophecies were written to mean something that will help us determine who the return of Christ/Messiah was. If you do not want to know the truth that's your choice.

You don't seem to understand my point.

If the prophecy can be interpreted in many different ways, then we can never be sure that we have the correct interpretation. And if we don't have the correct interpretation, then we can never claim that the prophecy has been fulfilled.

If the prophecy says "The giant will fall," then is it fulfilled by the 7 foot tall king who is slain in battle? The largest and most powerful kingdom being invaded by the realm to the north? The large mountain being destroyed in a volcanic eruption?

For the people who believe the prophecy is about the king, then the invasion does not fulfill the prophecy. But to someone who believes the prophecy is about the kingdom, then the invasion DOES fulfill the prophecy. Both people can agree that the invasion took place, but they still won't agree on whether the prophecy is fulfilled. And they will both agree that the prophecy has not been fulfilled if the only thing that happens is the volcanic eruption, yet that could have been exactly what the person who wrote the prophecy meant!

 

[Trailblazer]

Belief: an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof. "his belief in extraterrestrial life"

Opinion: a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. "that, in my opinion, is right"​

Both describe a viewpoint that is held without needing evidence or knowledge or proof.

Also, from the first source:

Belief: something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion. "we're prepared to fight for our beliefs"​

Yes, what those words have in common is that both describe a viewpoint that is held without needing evidence or knowledge or proof. However, either an opinion or a belief can be based upon facts and they can have evidence to support them. For example, I can have an opinion about the coronavirus vaccine based upon facts fro the CDC, and I can have a belief about my religion based upon facts about my religion.

You seem to have difficulty following the discussion. Is it that hard for you to click on the little up arrow next to your name in the posts where I quote you? That way you can see the posting that is being quoted, and you can keep going back to refresh yourself on what we have been discussing. It's a handy trick, I hope you'll make use of it in the future.

In any case, I would like you to show me how any claim of the supernatural makes sense.

Sorry, I get so many posts that I do not have time to backtrack on every post I get.
In any case, I cannot show you how supernatural claims make sense. You are either willing to entertain the possibility that there can be a supernatural or not. Then I would have to know what supernatural claims you are referring to. Are you referring to the existence of God or an afterlife in heaven?

 

[Trailblazer]

You don't seem to understand my point.

If the prophecy can be interpreted in many different ways, then we can never be sure that we have the correct interpretation. And if we don't have the correct interpretation, then we can never claim that the prophecy has been fulfilled.

I do understand your point and I partly agree with it but not fully. If the prophecy can be interpreted in many different ways, then we can never be sure that we have the correct interpretation and if we don't have the correct interpretation, then we can never claim that the prophecy has been fulfilled. That is why it would not be wise to rely upon one or two prophecies in order to determine if someone is the return of Christ or the Messiah, since we could be wrong in our interpretation or the meaning of those prophecies or they could be too vague to be useful. We need many pieces of a puzzle to come together in order for the picture that it makes to become clear. Can we agree on that?

I am sure you have heard of the preponderance of evidence, so it all the prophecies point to one man and who he was and what he did fulfilled all of the prophecies then it is likely he is the one to whom all of those prophecies are referring.

Likewise, we can also use prophecies to eliminate a claimant. For example, Christians believe that Isiah 53 is all about Jesus because they believe He is the Messiah. While some of the verses could apply to Jesus, not all of them can, so that means the chapter cannot be about Jesus.

Isaiah 53 KJV

8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.

Isaiah 53:8, Isaiah 53:9, and Isaiah 53:10 cannot apply to Jesus because Jesus was not taken from prison and from judgment, Jesus did not make His grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death. Jesus made his soul an offering for sin, but He did not see his seed and His days were not prolonged, so there is no way Isaiah 53:10 can be about Jesus, and that is why we know it is about someone else who would be the Messiah of the end days.

The other thing is that unless we have someone to apply those prophecies to they are not going to help determine anything. We have to look at two things: (1) what the prophecy says and (2) what the person we believe fulfilled it did to fulfill it. I can give you some examples if you want them.

 

[Tiberius]

Yes, what those words have in common is that both describe a viewpoint that is held without needing evidence or knowledge or proof. However, either an opinion or a belief can be based upon facts and they can have evidence to support them. For example, I can have an opinion about the coronavirus vaccine based upon facts fro the CDC, and I can have a belief about my religion based upon facts about my religion.

Even granting that, there's still a big difference between a belief about a belief based on science and a belief based on religion.

[quote[In any case, I cannot show you how supernatural claims make sense. You are either willing to entertain the possibility that there can be a supernatural or not. Then I would have to know what supernatural claims you are referring to. Are you referring to the existence of God or an afterlife in heaven?[/QUOTE]

I am referring to any supernatural claim.

In any case, if you can not show how they make sense, then they do not make sense. You've made a claim and provided no evidence, and as Hitchen's Razor tells us, "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

 

[Tiberius]

I do understand your point and I partly agree with it but not fully. If the prophecy can be interpreted in many different ways, then we can never be sure that we have the correct interpretation and if we don't have the correct interpretation, then we can never claim that the prophecy has been fulfilled. That is why it would not be wise to rely upon one or two prophecies in order to determine if someone is the return of Christ or the Messiah, since we could be wrong in our interpretation or the meaning of those prophecies or they could be too vague to be useful. We need many pieces of a puzzle to come together in order for the picture that it makes to become clear. Can we agree on that?

I'd agree to a degree, but even aside from the fact that we'd need an infinite number of prophecies to really be sure, there are numerous other problems with prophecies that leave them practically worthless.

The other thing is that unless we have someone to apply those prophecies to they are not going to help determine anything. We have to look at two things: (1) what the prophecy says and (2) what the person we believe fulfilled it did to fulfill it. I can give you some examples if you want them.

Here's the other problems with prophecies.

Let's say we have a text written in year 500 that includes a prophecy from Bill that says "The castle will burn down on the summer solstice." And then we have a text from the year 600 that says the castle burned down on the summer solstice. So we can say that Bill really was a prophet, since he made a prophecy that later came true. But there are always other explanations.

• Maybe the castle didn't burn down, and someone just wrote that it did to make it look like the prophecy came true.
• Maybe the castle did burn down, but after it burned down someone went in and added the prophecy bit in the first text.
• Maybe the prophecy was real and the castle really did burn down, but only because someone read the prophecy and decided to burn the castle down to make the prophecy come true.

And that's assuming that we have a non-vague prophecy in the first place.

So if you can give me some examples that take into account all of these issues, I'd like to see them. That is, prophecies that meet the following criteria:

1. Numerous prophecies about the same thing (as mentioned in the part of your post that I didn't quote here
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The the fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

I would love to see some examples of this.

 

[Trailblazer]

Even granting that, there's still a big difference between a belief about a belief based on science and a belief based on religion.

I will grant you that, since a belief based on science is verifiable whereas a belief based on religion is not usually verifiable, although facts about a religion are sometimes verifiable.

"In any case, I cannot show you how supernatural claims make sense. You are either willing to entertain the possibility that there can be a supernatural or not. Then I would have to know what supernatural claims you are referring to. Are you referring to the existence of God or an afterlife in heaven?"

I am referring to any supernatural claim.

In any case, if you can not show how they make sense, then they do not make sense.

That is not a logical statement because "what I can show you" does not prove anything as to whether supernatural claims are true or not.

You've made a claim and provided no evidence, and as Hitchen's Razor tells us, "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

There is no verifiable evidence of anything supernatural and I think you already know that.
That means that if you are ever going to believe in anything supernatural you have to go through the back door. What I mean by that is that you have to look at the religion that makes those claims to see if it makes any sense to you. Then, if the religion makes sense, the its claims of the supernatural can be accepted.

 

[Tiberius]

I will grant you that, since a belief based on science is verifiable whereas a belief based on religion is not usually verifiable, although facts about a religion are sometimes verifiable.

That's true. But some facts about the TV show M*A*S*H are also verifiable. That doesn't mean Klinger was a real person though.

That is not a logical statement because "what I can show you" does not prove anything as to whether supernatural claims are true or not.

By this logic, no one can ever provide any kind of evidence to anyone else.

There is no verifiable evidence of anything supernatural and I think you already know that.
That means that if you are ever going to believe in anything supernatural you have to go through the back door. What I mean by that is that you have to look at the religion that makes those claims to see if it makes any sense to you. Then, if the religion makes sense, the its claims of the supernatural can be accepted.

Oh yes, I know that there is no verifiable evidence of anything supernatural.

What I'm trying to figure out is why anyone would decide to believe in something for which there is no verifiable evidence.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'd agree to a degree, but even aside from the fact that we'd need an infinite number of prophecies to really be sure, there are numerous other problems with prophecies that leave them practically worthless.



Here's the other problems with prophecies.

Let's say we have a text written in year 500 that includes a prophecy from Bill that says "The castle will burn down on the summer solstice." And then we have a text from the year 600 that says the castle burned down on the summer solstice. So we can say that Bill really was a prophet, since he made a prophecy that later came true. But there are always other explanations.

• Maybe the castle didn't burn down, and someone just wrote that it did to make it look like the prophecy came true.
• Maybe the castle did burn down, but after it burned down someone went in and added the prophecy bit in the first text.
• Maybe the prophecy was real and the castle really did burn down, but only because someone read the prophecy and decided to burn the castle down to make the prophecy come true.

And that's assuming that we have a non-vague prophecy in the first place.

So if you can give me some examples that take into account all of these issues, I'd like to see them. That is, prophecies that meet the following criteria:

1. Numerous prophecies about the same thing (as mentioned in the part of your post that I didn't quote here
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The the fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

I would love to see some examples of this.

I will catch this post later, hopefully tonight, as it is a lot more involved to answer than your other post!

 

[Trailblazer]

That's true. But some facts about the TV show M*A*S*H are also verifiable. That doesn't mean Klinger was a real person though.

Unlike Jesus, we know for certain that Baha'u'llah was a real person in history because He was documented by historians. However, that does not mean that He was a Messenger of God, that can never be proven as a fact.

By this logic, no one can ever provide any kind of evidence to anyone else.

No, that is not true because I can provide evidence to you but that will not prove to you that the supernatural claims are true.

Oh yes, I know that there is no verifiable evidence of anything supernatural.

So why would you want me to provide evidence of such?

What I'm trying to figure out is why anyone would decide to believe in something for which there is no verifiable evidence.

Because not everyone needs verifiable evidence to believe something and besides that it makes no sense that supernatural things would have that kind of evidence. I mean how can something that is not physical be verified to exist? Think about it.

That is why I said we need to go through the 'back door' of religion, because once we accept the religion as true then we accept whatever the Messenger who revealed that religion wrote.

 

[cataway]

from were did that Baha'u'llah guy get his information

 

[cataway]

why are you's so worried about a place called hell ?? its really nothing more than the grave ! sure i know you dont want to go there, but hey there is really no way you are ever going to avoid it

 

[Trailblazer]

from were did that Baha'u'llah guy get his information

From the same place as Jesus got His information, from God, through the Holy Spirit...

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57

“And whenever I chose to hold my peace and be still, lo, the voice of the Holy Ghost, standing on my right hand, aroused me, and the Supreme Spirit appeared before my face, and Gabriel overshadowed me, and the Spirit of Glory stirred within my bosom, bidding me arise and break my silence. If your hearing be purged and your ears be attentive, ye will assuredly perceive that every limb of my body, nay all the atoms of my being, proclaim and bear witness to this call: “God, besides Whom is none other God, and He, Whose beauty is now manifest, is the reflection of His glory unto all that are in heaven and on earth.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 103-104

 

[cataway]

From the same place as Jesus got His information, from God, through the Holy Spirit...

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57

“And whenever I chose to hold my peace and be still, lo, the voice of the Holy Ghost, standing on my right hand, aroused me, and the Supreme Spirit appeared before my face, and Gabriel overshadowed me, and the Spirit of Glory stirred within my bosom, bidding me arise and break my silence. If your hearing be purged and your ears be attentive, ye will assuredly perceive that every limb of my body, nay all the atoms of my being, proclaim and bear witness to this call: “God, besides Whom is none other God, and He, Whose beauty is now manifest, is the reflection of His glory unto all that are in heaven and on earth.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 103-104

Baha'u'llah , did he raise the dead ? cure the sick? give sight to the blind? not likely.
Jesus was much more than a teacher, even a man that was with God physically and BTW has returned to that position . Baha'u'llah may tickle your fancy, but if not pointing you to Jesus ,to the kingdom , he, even those that fallow him, are working against the Christ.
only Jesus can save from death .
as it is my opinion and millions of others .

 

[Tiberius]

Unlike Jesus, we know for certain that Baha'u'llah was a real person in history because He was documented by historians. However, that does not mean that He was a Messenger of God, that can never be proven as a fact.

I'm happy to accept your claim that he existed as an actual person. Likewise, I agree that we can never claim it is factual that he was a messenger of God.

No, that is not true because I can provide evidence to you but that will not prove to you that the supernatural claims are true.

I think you missed my point. My point was that ANY evidence anyone could show about anything will fall into the category of "What I can show you."

So why would you want me to provide evidence of such?

I'd need such evidence before I could accept the supernatural as true.

Because not everyone needs verifiable evidence to believe something and besides that it makes no sense that supernatural things would have that kind of evidence. I mean how can something that is not physical be verified to exist? Think about it.

We can show that thoughts exist, yet those are not physical. I can't give a bucket of thought, after all.

But if there is ANYTHING that exists in reality and has any influence on us, then it MUST have some interaction with the physical world. And thus we can measure that interaction. And yet there has never, to my knowledge at least, been any case of something where the best explanation is a religious one.

 

[Trailblazer]

Baha'u'llah , did he raise the dead ? cure the sick? give sight to the blind? not likely.

Yes, Baha'u'llah raised someone from the dead but so what? That is not what matters.

Jesus was much more than a teacher, even a man that was with God physically and BTW has returned to that position.

Nobody was ever 'physically' with God. Jesus ascended to the father to be with Him in spirit and so did Baha'u'llah. they are both with God right now.

Baha'u'llah may tickle your fancy, but if not pointing you to Jesus ,to the kingdom , he, even those that fallow him, are working against the Christ.

Baha'u'llah did not work against Christ.
Referring to Jesus as the Son of Man, Baha’u’llah testified of Jesus and glorified Jesus.

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.

We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86

only Jesus can save from death.

Nobody can save is from physical death because that is imminent since we are mortal, always have been and always will be. What Jesus conferred upon us is eternal life of the soul, which is a state of the soul that is near to God, not eternal life of the body.

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

1 John 5:13 “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.”

Baha'u'llah also conferred eternal life upon us.

“O My servants! Whoso hath tasted of this Fountain hath attained unto everlasting Life, and whoso hath refused to drink therefrom is even as the dead.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p.169

“No man can obtain everlasting life, unless he embraceth the truth of this inestimable, this wondrous, and sublime Revelation.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 183

as it is my opinion and millions of others .

It does not matter how many people believe something, that does not make it true.

the fallacy of argumentum ad populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."

 

[Trailblazer]

I'd need such evidence before I could accept the supernatural as true.

There is no verifiable evidence of the supernatural, only what religion teaches about it and what some people have experienced.

We can show that thoughts exist, yet those are not physical. I can't give a bucket of thought, after all.

But if there is ANYTHING that exists in reality and has any influence on us, then it MUST have some interaction with the physical world. And thus we can measure that interaction. And yet there has never, to my knowledge at least, been any case of something where the best explanation is a religious one.

Messengers of God have an interaction with the physical world and God sends them as evidence of His existence and to bring us messages. God has an interaction with the physical world but we could never measure that interaction since we cannot detect it in any physical way.

 

[cataway]

Yes, Baha'u'llah raised someone from the dead but so what? That is not what matters.

Nobody was ever 'physically' with God. Jesus ascended to the father to be with Him in spirit and so did Baha'u'llah. they are both with God right now.

Baha'u'llah did not work against Christ.
Referring to Jesus as the Son of Man, Baha’u’llah testified of Jesus and glorified Jesus.

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things. Its evidences, as witnessed in all the peoples of the earth, are now manifest before thee. The deepest wisdom which the sages have uttered, the profoundest learning which any mind hath unfolded, the arts which the ablest hands have produced, the influence exerted by the most potent of rulers, are but manifestations of the quickening power released by His transcendent, His all-pervasive, and resplendent Spirit.

We testify that when He came into the world, He shed the splendor of His glory upon all created things. Through Him the leper recovered from the leprosy of perversity and ignorance. Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86

Nobody can save is from physical death because that is imminent since we are mortal, always have been and always will be. What Jesus conferred upon us is eternal life of the soul, which is a state of the soul that is near to God, not eternal life of the body.

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

1 John 5:13 “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.”

Baha'u'llah also conferred eternal life upon us.

“O My servants! Whoso hath tasted of this Fountain hath attained unto everlasting Life, and whoso hath refused to drink therefrom is even as the dead.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p.169

“No man can obtain everlasting life, unless he embraceth the truth of this inestimable, this wondrous, and sublime Revelation.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 183

It does not matter how many people believe something, that does not make it true.

the fallacy of argumentum ad populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

1 John 5:13 “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.”
did you note it says life . i should like to assume you know what life is ? as in not dead .like you are now.

 

[Trailblazer]

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

1 John 5:13 “I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.”
did you note it says life . i should like to assume you know what life is ? as in not dead .like you are now.

How do you know I am dead?

 

[Tiberius]

There is no verifiable evidence of the supernatural, only what religion teaches about it and what some people have experienced.

So there is no real way to differentiate it from a belief that is entirely wrong, is there?

Messengers of God have an interaction with the physical world and God sends them as evidence of His existence and to bring us messages.

I'm not debating that there are people who believe and/or are held up as messengers/representatives of God.

But just because there is a person who claims to be a messenger of God or is believed to be a messenger of God doesn't mean that God actually sent them.

God has an interaction with the physical world but we could never measure that interaction since we cannot detect it in any physical way.

Then I have two questions:

1. How do you know such interactions take place?
2. How can these interactions do anything if they are so small as to be undetectable?