Loved ones in hell - take 2.

[Link]

There is a battle between good and evil, while we tolerate each other and try to keep the peace as much as possible (both sides try to some extent), the oppression will never cease if we don't take side with the truthful ones.

God appointed his kings who rule through his light and has proven them through divine books through out history and miracles in public if they remain in public, and they are instance of his holy spirit and name, opposing them be it a family member or otherwise, is unacceptable, because it's too take side of the evil ones or be neutral in this battle between good and evil, both siding with oppressors or apathy to their oppression is not acceptable.

God sent us clear proofs so we take side of goodness and beauty of his light, and not get confused for those leaders unseen or seen, guides, seen or unseen, without proofs from God.

He in all times has one to hold the station of the holy spirit, his image, and his name, so as to not go astray and depend on misguiding Jinn or their friends.

And not seeing God and his proof is also not acceptable, for many more reasons, than I just mentioned. And those who don't know the truth for other reasons than hatred to the truth will not be punished. But those who refuse to give the truth a chance and don't seek it out of hatred, then they deserve hell for their stance.

 

[Aupmanyav]

No, that is not true. The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4, were written by Adib Taherzadeh. God Passes By was written by Shoghi Effendi. There was no "family enterprise."

Shoghi was the last of the family. How was what I wrote not true? It is like Paul describing Jesus. Anything can be got written.

 

[Trailblazer]

Shoghi was the last of the family. How was what I wrote not true? It is like Paul describing Jesus. Anything can be got written.

You said: Both these are Bahai publications, a repeat of what Bahaollah, Abdul-Baha and Shoghi wrote. A family enterprise till the family lasted.
I said: No, that is not true. The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4, were written by Adib Taherzadeh. God Passes By was written by Shoghi Effendi. There was no "family enterprise.

I meant that it is not true that nobody else except Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi wrote about Baha'u'llah because Adib Taherzadeh also wrote about Baha'u'llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

You also believe that whatever was written about him was true, and you only believe that he is a messenger of God because of what was written about him.

How else could I EVER know anything about Him, except for what was written about Him?

Then how can you claim that any of the arguments for God is utterly convincing?

If you are willing to accept that the argument is wrong, you don't seem to be utterly convinced.

I think I already explained that before. I cannot claim that my arguments for God are utterly convincing to other people, even though I am utterly convinced.

But even though I am utterly convinced I am willing to accept that I could be wrong because anyone can be wrong about anything. For example, I might be utterly convinced that my husband would never cheat on me and then if I found out he cheated on me I would no longer be utterly convinced. So if I found out that Baha’u’llah had done something I never knew about that would make it impossible for Him to be a true Messenger if God, say for example I found out He had lied about something or had done something atrocious, then I would no longer be convinced that He was a true Messenger of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

Strange, since you have claimed that Baha was the return of the messiah, and yet you agree that you can't prove it. SOURCE

Sounds like you have a double standard.

No, I never CLAIMED that Baha’u’llah was the return of the messiah, never ever.

I said I BELIEVE Baha’u’llah was the return of the Christ. Baha’u’llah was the one who CLAIMED to be the return of Christ.

From your SOURCE:

I said that I believe that Baha’u’llah was a true Messenger of God. I did not say I believe it is true just because Baha’u’llah wrote it.
First I had to determine that He was a Messenger of God and then I believed whatever He wrote was true. There is nothing logically flawed about that.

So what?

You claim to have evidence, and you dismiss their evidence.

They do exactly the same thing. They claim to have evidence that they are right, and they dismiss your evidence. How do you not see that you are both exactly the same. You each claim that you have it right while the other has it wrong.

No, we are not the same. I have an actual person who fulfilled all the Bible prophecies and all they have is a hope that Jesus will return someday. In short, they have nothing but a hope.

And that is WHY it is not the same.

Where is Jesus? Did He get hung up in the clouds He was supposed to come in because of bad weather?

No, Jesus never promised to return in the clouds, that is a misinterpretation of what the Bible means. Whatever verses say that the Son of man will return in the clouds do not mean the physical clouds in the sky. It means things that will cloud the judgment.

Baha’u’llah explained the meaning of clouds in The Kitáb-i-Íqán. The term “clouds” as used in the Bible means those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Just like the physical clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, the desires of men hindered men from recognizing the return of Christ. Thus the meaning of clouds is symbolic, not literal. Their judgment was clouded. Christians were looking for the same man Jesus in the same body that resurrected and ascended to appear in the actual physical clouds in the sky with power and great glory, trumpets and angels, but when that did not happen that way they rejected Baha’u’llah. However, if one looks at what happened before, during and after Baha’u’llah appeared there is not one prophecy that cannot be applied to Him.

Jesus will never be anywhere except in heaven because Jesus never promised to return, never. In fact, Jesus said he was no more in the work and His work was finished here (John 14:19, John 17:11, John 17:4, John 19:30)

If you have doubts about Jesus being as he was depicted in the NT, then how do you even know he exists, since that's pretty much the only place in the Bible where he is depicted at all?

I mean, that's like me saying that I'm convinced that Harry Potter is a real person, but he was nothing like the character depicted in the Harry Potter books.

No, it is not like Harry Potter because the only place where the Harry Potter character is depicted is in the Harry Potter books.

I don’t need the Bible in order to know that Jesus existed and what His actual mission on earth was, because that is explained in the Baha’i Writings. As far as I am concerned, anything written about Jesus in the Baha’i Writings trumps the Bible because the Bible was written by men who never even knew Jesus, whereas Baha’u’llah knew who Jesus was because (a) He had knowledge from God and (b) He was the same spirit as Jesus, thus He had memory of everything Jesus ever said or did.

I already know why. Because he doesn't exist, and when people claim to hear God speaking to them it's a sign of mental illness of some sort. Schizophrenia often causes people to either believe they are being spoken to by God, or that they are the return of the Messiah.

"Sufferers may believe that they are a saint, a prophet or God himself, (which is more common in men), or (in women) that they are a saint or are pregnant with the Messiah." SOURCE

"Patients may believe that they are God, or God's chosen messenger." SOURCE

It is true that when people claim to hear God speaking to them it's a sign of mental illness of some sort and that schizophrenia often causes people to believe they are being spoken to by God, but that does not mean that God never spoke to real Messengers. To say that would be to commit the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization and the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions.

Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.

Hasty generalization usually shows this pattern

1. X is true for A.
2. X is true for B.
3. Therefore, X is true for C, D, etc.

Faulty generalization - Wikipedia

For example, if a person sees 10 people, all of them mentally ill people claiming God spoke to them, they may erroneously conclude that God never spoke to Messengers of God. That is not only a hasty generalization, it is jumping to conclusions, unless you have sufficient evidence and have considered all the variables.

Unless you can prove that there was never a Messenger of God it is just your personal opinion.

Well, it makes God a jerk, for a start, and certainly means he isn't worthy of worship.

You are free to believe that if you want to but just remember, if you do like any of the bad stuff God created that causes suffering you should not have any of the good stuff that brings joy either… That means no food, no drink, no sex, no going in vacations for the nice scenery that is only here because God created it.

 

[Trailblazer]

Are you actually telling me that Bahai scholars don't cherrypick, and then say that all faiths cherrypick?

Yes, that is what I am telling you. Baha’i scholars just want to know the facts; they are not looking to prove their religious beliefs.

 

[Trailblazer]

The long version is fine with me. I'm curious to see what Aupmanyav has to say about it.

As I've already mentioned, I've already got an answer that works and is entirely consistent with what we know and what can be shown to exist (unless you're going to say schizophrenia isn't real). Whatever explanation you provide is gonna have to be pretty damn good to get me to view your religiously-based explanation as more likely.

Trailblazer said: There is more than one reason why God does not speak to anyone except His Messengers. Do you want the short version or the long version?

FYI, this post is not about why God speaks to Messengers, it is about why God does not speak to anyone except His Messengers. Why God speaks to Messengers is another topic.

Without the Messengers of God, there could never be any communication between God and humans, because ordinary humans could never understand God if God spoke to them directly. God is exalted beyond the understanding of ordinary humans so we cannot receive or understand messages from God. There can never be any be any direct communication between God and ordinary humans and that is why God sends Messengers who are both divine and human. Messengers of God are humans who are Godlike in the sense that they have a divine mind. Their divine nature is not something we ordinary humans can comprehend, but we can understand their human nature, and that is why they can bridge the gap between God and ordinary humans and act as mediators.

“And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself............. The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

The Manifestation of God (what I refer to as a Messenger) is a pure and stainless Soul who is made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. He is made of the substance of God Himself so He is not just an ordinary human, He is another order of Creation above a human. Because he has qualities of both God and man, He can act as a mediator between God and man and He has the capacity to receive and understand communication from God and relay it back to ordinary humans in a way that they can comprehend it.

 

[Tiberius]

How else could I EVER know anything about Him, except for what was written about Him?

Well, even then, you'd need some way to verify that what was written about him was actually accurate.

I think I already explained that before. I cannot claim that my arguments for God are utterly convincing to other people, even though I am utterly convinced.

But even though I am utterly convinced I am willing to accept that I could be wrong because anyone can be wrong about anything. For example, I might be utterly convinced that my husband would never cheat on me and then if I found out he cheated on me I would no longer be utterly convinced. So if I found out that Baha’u’llah had done something I never knew about that would make it impossible for Him to be a true Messenger if God, say for example I found out He had lied about something or had done something atrocious, then I would no longer be convinced that He was a true Messenger of God.

Glad to hear it. Most people hold so stubbornly to their beliefs that they will ignore things that can't be denied if those things prove their beliefs are wrong. Glad to see you are more open minded than that.

 

[Tiberius]

No, I never CLAIMED that Baha’u’llah was the return of the messiah, never ever.

I said I BELIEVE Baha’u’llah was the return of the Christ. Baha’u’llah was the one who CLAIMED to be the return of Christ.

From your SOURCE:

I said that I believe that Baha’u’llah was a true Messenger of God. I did not say I believe it is true just because Baha’u’llah wrote it.
First I had to determine that He was a Messenger of God and then I believed whatever He wrote was true. There is nothing logically flawed about that.

Okay, so you aren't making the claim, you are saying you believe a claim that someone else has made. I think that's pretty close to the same thing though, right?

No, we are not the same. I have an actual person who fulfilled all the Bible prophecies and all they have is a hope that Jesus will return someday. In short, they have nothing but a hope.

And that is WHY it is not the same.

Where is Jesus? Did He get hung up in the clouds He was supposed to come in because of bad weather?

No, Jesus never promised to return in the clouds, that is a misinterpretation of what the Bible means. Whatever verses say that the Son of man will return in the clouds do not mean the physical clouds in the sky. It means things that will cloud the judgment.

Baha’u’llah explained the meaning of clouds in The Kitáb-i-Íqán. The term “clouds” as used in the Bible means those things that are contrary to the ways and desires of men. Just like the physical clouds prevent the eyes of men from beholding the sun, the desires of men hindered men from recognizing the return of Christ. Thus the meaning of clouds is symbolic, not literal. Their judgment was clouded. Christians were looking for the same man Jesus in the same body that resurrected and ascended to appear in the actual physical clouds in the sky with power and great glory, trumpets and angels, but when that did not happen that way they rejected Baha’u’llah. However, if one looks at what happened before, during and after Baha’u’llah appeared there is not one prophecy that cannot be applied to Him.

Jesus will never be anywhere except in heaven because Jesus never promised to return, never. In fact, Jesus said he was no more in the work and His work was finished here (John 14:19, John 17:11, John 17:4, John 19:30)

There are plenty of instances of people claiming to be the return of Jesus and other people believing them. You aren't so different.

No, it is not like Harry Potter because the only place where the Harry Potter character is depicted is in the Harry Potter books.

I don’t need the Bible in order to know that Jesus existed and what His actual mission on earth was, because that is explained in the Baha’i Writings. As far as I am concerned, anything written about Jesus in the Baha’i Writings trumps the Bible because the Bible was written by men who never even knew Jesus, whereas Baha’u’llah knew who Jesus was because (a) He had knowledge from God and (b) He was the same spirit as Jesus, thus He had memory of everything Jesus ever said or did.

You are forgetting the tremendous amount of Harry Potter fan fics out there.

It is true that when people claim to hear God speaking to them it's a sign of mental illness of some sort and that schizophrenia often causes people to believe they are being spoken to by God, but that does not mean that God never spoke to real Messengers. To say that would be to commit the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization and the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions.

Hasty generalization is an informal fallacy of faulty generalization by reaching an inductive generalization based on insufficient evidence—essentially making a hasty conclusion without considering all of the variables.

Hasty generalization usually shows this pattern

1. X is true for A.
2. X is true for B.
3. Therefore, X is true for C, D, etc.

Faulty generalization - Wikipedia

For example, if a person sees 10 people, all of them mentally ill people claiming God spoke to them, they may erroneously conclude that God never spoke to Messengers of God. That is not only a hasty generalization, it is jumping to conclusions, unless you have sufficient evidence and have considered all the variables.

Unless you can prove that there was never a Messenger of God it is just your personal opinion.

I think that's a little unfair. I mean, you are basically agreeing with me that it's a sign of mental illness, but then you turn around and claim that I need to go through each and every case of people believing that God is speaking to them and prove that it wasn't.

However, I've got a clear explanation of how a clearly definable mental illness can result in the phenomenon we are talking about. There's no part of the explanation that is hard to believe. Each and every part of it has been clearly demonstrated. Thus, it should be the default position. Whenever we find someone who claims that God has spoken to them in this way, we should view it as a sign they are experiencing this mental illness. And yet you refuse to do so.

Let me put it another way:

I could claim that dirty dishes are made clean by the sink fairy who comes and cleans the dishes. You would say that's ridiculous, since we can easily explain how dishes become clean without needing to invoke the sink fairy. But then I say, "It is true that when people claim that their dishes were cleaned it's a sign that they washed the dishes themselves, but that does not mean that Sink Fairies never cleaned any dishes. To say that would be to commit the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization and the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions."

You are free to believe that if you want to but just remember, if you do like any of the bad stuff God created that causes suffering you should not have any of the good stuff that brings joy either… That means no food, no drink, no sex, no going in vacations for the nice scenery that is only here because God created it.

That's utterly ridiculous.

Even if I grant that God is real, it does not mean it is acceptable for me to accept unnecessary hardship just because he also provides some good stuff. That's like a parent saying that their kids should accept random violent beatings because the parents also let their children have unlimited amounts of chocolate ice cream and play with puppies all day. It's abusive behavior, and anyone who thinks that someone providing pleasure excuses that same person providing harm is supporting an abuser.

 

[Tiberius]

Yes, that is what I am telling you.

Bahais: We don't cherrypick!

Also Bahais: All faiths cherrypick!

Think about it.

 

[Tiberius]

Trailblazer said: There is more than one reason why God does not speak to anyone except His Messengers. Do you want the short version or the long version?

FYI, this post is not about why God speaks to Messengers, it is about why God does not speak to anyone except His Messengers. Why God speaks to Messengers is another topic.

Without the Messengers of God, there could never be any communication between God and humans, because ordinary humans could never understand God if God spoke to them directly. God is exalted beyond the understanding of ordinary humans so we cannot receive or understand messages from God. There can never be any be any direct communication between God and ordinary humans and that is why God sends Messengers who are both divine and human. Messengers of God are humans who are Godlike in the sense that they have a divine mind. Their divine nature is not something we ordinary humans can comprehend, but we can understand their human nature, and that is why they can bridge the gap between God and ordinary humans and act as mediators.

“And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself............. The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

The Manifestation of God (what I refer to as a Messenger) is a pure and stainless Soul who is made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. He is made of the substance of God Himself so He is not just an ordinary human, He is another order of Creation above a human. Because he has qualities of both God and man, He can act as a mediator between God and man and He has the capacity to receive and understand communication from God and relay it back to ordinary humans in a way that they can comprehend it.

All powerful being that can do anything can't make himself understood by the very creatures he created. You'd think God could have fixed that in the development phase, wouldn't you?

And anyway, you'd think if it was that important that God gets his message across, he would have made EVERYONE like that, so we wouldn't need to play this supernatural game of telephone.

You'd also think that his messengers would provide, you know, a consistent message!

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, even then, you'd need some way to verify that what was written about him was actually accurate.

The best we can do is read everything that is available to read and then it is a judgment call.

Of course we also have what He wrote as a way to help us determine if He was a real Messenger of God.
But in the end, it is a subjective call as to whether we believe Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God or not because such a claim can never be proven as a fact.

 

[Trailblazer]

Okay, so you aren't making the claim, you are saying you believe a claim that someone else has made. I think that's pretty close to the same thing though, right?

No, it is not the same because I cannot make claims unless I have evidence to back up my claims. Baha’u’llah made claims but He offered evidence to back up His claims.

There are plenty of instances of people claiming to be the return of Jesus and other people believing them. You aren't so different.

Yes, there are plenty of people claiming to be the return of Jesus and other people believing them, but those claimants do not have any evidence to back up their claims. That is how Baha’u’llah was different.

You are forgetting the tremendous amount of Harry Potter fan fics out there.

But what does that prove? Does it prove Harry Potter was a real person? Even the fans do not believe that.

I think that's a little unfair. I mean, you are basically agreeing with me that it's a sign of mental illness, but then you turn around and claim that I need to go through each and every case of people believing that God is speaking to them and prove that it wasn't.

I said that hearing voices and believing it was God speaking to them is almost universally a sign of mental illness, but that does not mean that God never spoke to real Messengers. I never suggested you should look at everyone who ever claimed God spoke to them as there would need to be a really good reason for you to even look at their claims. A real Messenger if God would at least have to meet the following criteria.

1. A lot of books written about him describing what he did in His mission
2. Scriptures that were written by Him
3. A religion that was established in His name

Then as you were reading the books describing his mission in earth you would have to think about why a man would do all of what he did and write all if what he wrote, what would be his motive? Why would Baha’u’llah do what He did and get thrown into prison and exile and banishment from His native Persia for 40 years when He could have instead chosen to follow in his father’s footsteps and become a high official in the government and lived a cushy life?

Then as you were reading the scriptures that Baha’u’llah wrote you would have to ask yourself where He came up with all those ideas for the unity of mankind and world peace and how it was going to be achieved, and where did He get the idea for setting up a world government? How did He know about all the biblical prophets and events that took place in the Bible, and how was He able to see into the future and predict the fall of the kings and rulers as well as the two world wars, how was He able to know that there would the all the racial discord and political unrest we are seeing in the world right now.

And that is just for starters.

However, I've got a clear explanation of how a clearly definable mental illness can result in the phenomenon we are talking about. There's no part of the explanation that is hard to believe. Each and every part of it has been clearly demonstrated. Thus, it should be the default position. Whenever we find someone who claims that God has spoken to them in this way, we should view it as a sign they are experiencing this mental illness. And yet you refuse to do so.

That is not true. I would absolutely view it as a sign of mental illness, UNLESS I had a very good reason not to think so (as above).

Let me put it another way:

I could claim that dirty dishes are made clean by the sink fairy who comes and cleans the dishes. You would say that's ridiculous, since we can easily explain how dishes become clean without needing to invoke the sink fairy. But then I say, "It is true that when people claim that their dishes were cleaned it's a sign that they washed the dishes themselves, but that does not mean that Sink Fairies never cleaned any dishes. To say that would be to commit the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization and the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions."

No, that would not be the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization or the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions because there would be NO REASON to believe that the dishes were washed by the sink fairy. Is there any evidence that a sink fairy even exists? And since we have a logical explanation for how dishes get washed we should go with that explanation.

By contrast, there is no logical explanation for Baha’u’llah other than He was who He claimed to be. If you knew what Baha’u’llah did in His life and during His mission and what He wrote, you could not attribute it to mental illness because a mentally ill person could never do what He did or write what He wrote. Not only that but he had no formal education so the knowledge He had did not come from schooling. It was innate knowledge and knowledge from God.

That's utterly ridiculous.

But why is it ridiculous? After all, if God created all the bad things in the world, God would also have created all the good things in the world, that is only logical.

Even if I grant that God is real, it does not mean it is acceptable for me to accept unnecessary hardship just because he also provides some good stuff. That's like a parent saying that their kids should accept random violent beatings because the parents also let their children have unlimited amounts of chocolate ice cream and play with puppies all day. It's abusive behavior, and anyone who thinks that someone providing pleasure excuses that same person providing harm is supporting an abuser.

No, that analogy won’t fly because God does not commit the random violent beatings, people do that stuff, but if people followed God’s teachings and laws there would be no parental behavior like that or any other immoral behaviors for that matter.

God is not providing the pleasures or the harm; they are just part and parcel of living in a material world that is subject to both pleasure and pain.

 

[Trailblazer]

Bahais: We don't cherrypick!

Also Bahais: All faiths cherrypick!

Think about it.

First, you have to define what you mean by cherry-pick, cherry-pick what?

Second, I said that Baha'i scholars do not cherry-pick, I never said that no other Baha'is cherry-pick.

Trailblazer said:
You are assuming a motive that does not exist. Baha'i scholars have studied the Bible and some to certain conclusions about what is accurate. People all faiths and nonbelievers pick and choose what they believe that is in the Bible. Most Christians do not even interpret all of the Bible literally.

Third, you will have to show me where I said that Baha'is don't cherry-pick, because context is very important.

 

[Trailblazer]

All powerful being that can do anything can't make himself understood by the very creatures he created. You'd think God could have fixed that in the development phase, wouldn't you?

No, because God never wanted to be understood by everyone, God only ever wanted to be understood by the Messengers that were created for that express purpose. There is no need for God to be understood by everyone since the Messengers can understand God and pass along God's message to everyone.

And anyway, you'd think if it was that important that God gets his message across, he would have made EVERYONE like that, so we wouldn't need to play this supernatural game of telephone.

God did not want everyone to get the message, He only wanted the people who were worthy of getting it to get it.
By using Messengers everyone can prove themselves worthy or not worthy. Those who recognize the Messengers are worthy of getting the message, the others are not worthy. There are no free rides, that's not how it works.

You'd also think that his messengers would provide, you know, a consistent message!

No, you would not think that because people and the world change over time, the message also has to change over time. Why would the same message we got in biblical times still be what is needed in the modern age we live in?

 

[Tiberius]

No, it is not the same because I cannot make claims unless I have evidence to back up my claims. Baha’u’llah made claims but He offered evidence to back up His claims.

But that evidence can't be verified.

Yes, there are plenty of people claiming to be the return of Jesus and other people believing them, but those claimants do not have any evidence to back up their claims. That is how Baha’u’llah was different.

The followers of each one of those claimants believed there was sufficient evidence.

But what does that prove? Does it prove Harry Potter was a real person? Even the fans do not believe that.

So what? Things are not true or false just because people believe them to be true or false.

I said that hearing voices and believing it was God speaking to them is almost universally a sign of mental illness, but that does not mean that God never spoke to real Messengers. I never suggested you should look at everyone who ever claimed God spoke to them as there would need to be a really good reason for you to even look at their claims. A real Messenger if God would at least have to meet the following criteria.

1. A lot of books written about him describing what he did in His mission
2. Scriptures that were written by Him
3. A religion that was established in His name

Then as you were reading the books describing his mission in earth you would have to think about why a man would do all of what he did and write all if what he wrote, what would be his motive? Why would Baha’u’llah do what He did and get thrown into prison and exile and banishment from His native Persia for 40 years when He could have instead chosen to follow in his father’s footsteps and become a high official in the government and lived a cushy life?

Then as you were reading the scriptures that Baha’u’llah wrote you would have to ask yourself where He came up with all those ideas for the unity of mankind and world peace and how it was going to be achieved, and where did He get the idea for setting up a world government? How did He know about all the biblical prophets and events that took place in the Bible, and how was He able to see into the future and predict the fall of the kings and rulers as well as the two world wars, how was He able to know that there would the all the racial discord and political unrest we are seeing in the world right now.

And that is just for starters.

So what if God spoke to someone who then got marooned on a deserted island? He'd be a messenger, but no books, no scriptures, no religion.

And how do you figure those ideas could only have come from God?

That is not true. I would absolutely view it as a sign of mental illness, UNLESS I had a very good reason not to think so (as above).

Quite a few of those people had devoted followers, wrote their own texts. Why shouldn't that count?

No, that would not be the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization or the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions because there would be NO REASON to believe that the dishes were washed by the sink fairy. Is there any evidence that a sink fairy even exists? And since we have a logical explanation for how dishes get washed we should go with that explanation.

Ah, and I could say the same about your messengers.

No, that would not be the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization or the Fallacy of Jumping to conclusions because there would be NO REASON to believe that the people were actually spoken to by God. Is there any evidence that a God even exists? And since we have a logical explanation for how people believe that they hear the voice of God we should go with that explanation.

See? The same logic works against your position. If you claim that it works when you use it against sink fairies but it doesn't work when I use it against messengers from God, then you've got a double standard.

By contrast, there is no logical explanation for Baha’u’llah other than He was who He claimed to be. If you knew what Baha’u’llah did in His life and during His mission and what He wrote, you could not attribute it to mental illness because a mentally ill person could never do what He did or write what He wrote. Not only that but he had no formal education so the knowledge He had did not come from schooling. It was innate knowledge and knowledge from God.

Argument from incredulity.

But why is it ridiculous? After all, if God created all the bad things in the world, God would also have created all the good things in the world, that is only logical.

Why do you ask me questions when I answered that question in literally the very next sentence?

No, that analogy won’t fly because God does not commit the random violent beatings, people do that stuff, but if people followed God’s teachings and laws there would be no parental behavior like that or any other immoral behaviors for that matter.

God is not providing the pleasures or the harm; they are just part and parcel of living in a material world that is subject to both pleasure and pain.

And yet God still allows it when he can stop it. He also deliberately created the situation knowing what would happen. God is to blame, whether you like it or not.

 

[Tiberius]

First, you have to define what you mean by cherry-pick, cherry-pick what?

Second, I said that Baha'i scholars do not cherry-pick, I never said that no other Baha'is cherry-pick.

Trailblazer said:
You are assuming a motive that does not exist. Baha'i scholars have studied the Bible and some to certain conclusions about what is accurate. People all faiths and nonbelievers pick and choose what they believe that is in the Bible. Most Christians do not even interpret all of the Bible literally.

Third, you will have to show me where I said that Baha'is don't cherry-pick, because context is very important.

I think I've been very clear.

 

[Tiberius]

No, because God never wanted to be understood by everyone, God only ever wanted to be understood by the Messengers that were created for that express purpose. There is no need for God to be understood by everyone since the Messengers can understand God and pass along God's message to everyone.

God: Yes, I have important information I want people to live by.

Also God: They don't need to understand me. Instead, I'll just send different messages to different people who will then play a religious game of telephone to give my important message the best chance of getting jumbled up and misunderstood. Yes, that's the best way to do it.

God did not want everyone to get the message, He only wanted the people who were worthy of getting it to get it.
By using Messengers everyone can prove themselves worthy or not worthy. Those who recognize the Messengers are worthy of getting the message, the others are not worthy. There are no free rides, that's not how it works.

Please, God could have made everyone worthy. In any case, if God knows everything, then he already knows who is worthy and who isn't, so he can send his message directly to them without needing to bother with the messengers.

No, you would not think that because people and the world change over time, the message also has to change over time. Why would the same message we got in biblical times still be what is needed in the modern age we live in?

Why would the same message we got from Bahaiulla still be what is needed in the modern age we live in?