Nothing lasts forever in this life

[CG Didymus]

Hold on. You were earlier complaining about people who have to be only right, never wrong.
Now you are saying that it's ok to insist that you are right and not consider the possibility that you are wrong - as I do.

We have established that @Trailblazer and @Seeker of White Light expect sceptics to meet them halfway, but they don't have to budge an inch.
And yet they accuse me of being inflexible and only wanting to be right.

Yeah, so what does it mean to meet someone halfway that believes their prophet and religion is the infallible truth? How many people and how many times have Baha'is been asked to provide objective evidence? That debate went nowhere. There was no "halfway". Now the claim is about an afterlife. There's all kinds of people who have been to this spiritual world. But they all come from different religions and believe different things about it. What do Baha'is say about the people who saw hell or purgatory? What do they say to people that saw themselves in their past lives? They'll use the same arguments against them that we are using against Baha'is. Those people are wrong, because there is no such thing as reincarnation. Therefore, what you think you saw isn't real. It was your imagination tricking you based on what you believe to be true.

And again and again and again... Considering the track record of religions, isn't it a good idea to demand objective, tangible proof of their claims? Rather than just accepting the word of their prophet? If they don't got proof, fine. They should just say that it is just their belief, that they have come to believe it but don't expect others to believe it. And sometimes they kind of do that. But they are just as guilty of pushing the argument beyond that. When we do it, it's because we just can't let it go. Why would they do it? I think it's because, in their mind, they think their beliefs are true. And, as they've pretty much admitted, there is no halfway point. To them God is real and Baha'u'llah, and whatever he said, is the absolute truth.

There is no halfway point between the Baha'i beliefs and any atheist or anybody from any other religion that has different beliefs than them. They are right. Others should give them the benefit of the doubt and take an unbiased look at their religion. And an honest, and truly spiritual person, will see that it is true. But I'm sure you're used to that. We all get it from other proselytizing religions, especially born-again Fundy Christians. And funny, they tell me what the afterlife is like too. Believe and go to heaven. Deny Jesus and go to hell. But then the Baha'is tell me that is BS.

 

[CG Didymus]

Meeting half way is acknowleging the strong points of the opposition's reasoning and not repeatedly putting out weak arguments of your own which are not going to be believed.

It tough with religions, because people believe them to be true. Now a Reformed Jew and a liberal Christian might be able to agree on spiritual things. But what about an Orthodox Jew and a Fundamentalist Christian? But you should know, even then is the Jew more willing to compromise than the Christian?

With Baha'is? What can a person do? They are still a religion that believes they are right and have the latest revelation from God. They believe they have a message that can bring peace and unite the world. They believe their prophet is the Promised One that was predicted by all the other religions. Therefore, they are taught, it is their duty to tell everybody all about it. In too many cases, it's not meeting someone halfway, it is finding a way to convince them of the truth. And it is worse when people don't realize they are doing that and deny it. Because, I think, if they really weren't doing it, they could accept people for who they are and what they believe and meet them halfway.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It tough with religions, because people believe them to be true. Now a Reformed Jew and a liberal Christian might be able to agree on spiritual things. But what about an Orthodox Jew and a Fundamentalist Christian? But you should know, even then is the Jew more willing to compromise than the Christian?

With Baha'is? What can a person do? They are still a religion that believes they are right and have the latest revelation from God. They believe they have a message that can bring peace and unite the world. They believe their prophet is the Promised One that was predicted by all the other religions. Therefore, they are taught, it is their duty to tell everybody all about it. In too many cases, it's not meeting someone halfway, it is finding a way to convince them of the truth. And it is worse when people don't realize they are doing that and deny it. Because, I think, if they really weren't doing it, they could accept people for who they are and what they believe and meet them halfway.

So you think Baha'is do not understand that other people believe differently than us? Of course Baha'is understand this, and one carry love, compassion and kindness toward others within them selves.

When attacked mostly all Baha'is (that I know of) will respond with kindness and try to explain.
It is not Baha'is fault that other people misunderstand on purpose to create tention in discussion. Or since others believe differently everything a Baha'i says will be twisted to something they did not say.

 

[CG Didymus]

So you think Baha'is do not understand that other people believe differently than us?

First of all, this is what I said...

Therefore, they are taught, it is their duty to tell everybody all about it. In too many cases, it's not meeting someone halfway, it is finding a way to convince them of the truth. And it is worse when people don't realize they are doing that and deny it. Because, I think, if they really weren't doing it, they could accept people for who they are and what they believe and meet them halfway.

So, are you doing what you accuse others of doing? When you say this...

It is not Baha'is fault that other people misunderstand on purpose to create tention in discussion. Or since others believe differently everything a Baha'i says will be twisted to something they did not say.

So, what was my point. Which was not to you, but I understand that it involves you and the other Baha'is.

Baha'is are taught to teach the Faith. Right or wrong? I'd think they are. Will they compromise their beliefs to meet someone else, let's say a Christian or an Atheist, halfway? What do you think? I don't think they will or, especially if their beliefs are true, that they should.

So, how could a Baha'i communicate their beliefs to someone else? How would you do it? I think I'd try and find common ground. Something we can both relate to. But move the conversation in a direction where I could pass on some information about the Baha'i Faith.

That's not the same as meeting a person halfway. It is manipulating the conversation very much like a good salesman would do. And what happens here? A Baha'is starts a thread. What is the purpose of the thread? If it's about some religious or spiritual questions, if not in the OP itself, then at some point the Baha'i will say something about what the Baha'i Faith teaches about the thing mentioned in the OP.

Does the Baha'i really care what other people have to say about it? Did the Baha'i intend to take the information and formulate some kind of belief about the thing in the OP? I doubt it. I think probably the Baha'is already knows what they believe about the subject. They just need a way to get other people thinking about it and talking about, and then tell them what the Baha'i Faith has to say about it.

If you don't think that's happening, that's fine. That's just my opinion, and if I was a Baha'i or a Christian or any other religion, I think I'd even use that method. Because what's wrong with it? I need to get people to know about my beliefs. Beliefs I think are the very truth from God, but I can't just come right out and say that. I have to find a way to sneak it into the conversation. But once I do that, do I expect other people, especially Atheists, to just say, "Oh good point. I never thought of that before." No, I'd expect some opposition. But... does that bother me? No, because I have the truth from God on my side. I know what I believe is true and I know how to lay it out in front of others, so they can clearly see how it makes so much sense.

Or does it? I thought it did. But why are these Atheists not seeing what I see in these profound and wonderful teachings from God? If I feel I'm being attacked is it them or me? Am I making religious claims I can't support? I may not like it. It might even seem to get personal sometimes. But if I have the truth, the greater problem is me. Why am I even trying to convince an Atheists about God and other spiritual things that I can't prove? About things we can't know until we're dead. Why would a person that requires objective, tangible proof listen to my claims about God, prophets and the afterlife? Why would I keep putting out threads that make claims/statements about those things, knowing that it will be mostly people that disagree with me will respond to?

Anyway, let's move on....

Baha'is understand this, and one carry love, compassion and kindness toward others within them selves.

This came after you saying... "So you think Baha'is do not understand that other people believe differently than us?" Where exactly did I say that? Nowhere. Because I think Baha'is do know that others have very different beliefs than themselves. And if they treat those people with love, compassion and kindness that would be just great. But why don't you take a survey. How many Atheists have been treated with kindness by Baha'is? Better yet with respect and understanding. That would be a great place to start a conversation with an Atheist at. And don't tell me, "But they don't respect us." No, the Baha'i is the one that has to do it. It is the Baha'i that knows they have the truth. It is the Baha'i that has to show the love and compassion. Knowing.... that sometimes that won't be shown kindness in return. But does that matter to the Baha'i? No, the Baha'i should probably say some prayers for those people and return hate with love and anger with kindness. Is that what is happening? Apparently...

When attacked mostly all Baha'is (that I know of) will respond with kindness and try to explain.

I'd take a closer look at this. But I agree.... that is how a Baha'i should respond. And "explain"? Yes, explain what Baha'is believe with love, respect and kindness and move on. Baha'is have been just as guilty of going around in circles.

So, I expect to be treated with love and compassion from now on. I can't wait to hear from you and the other Baha'is. And knowing that I'm a lost sinful person, and I'll do or say something that disturbs you sooner or later, that you're also forgiving.

 

[Truthseeker]

I don't know why you differentiate between an "animal spirit" and a soul.
To me, it is the same thing.
Almighty God has given us all our natures. He has caused us to exceed other creatures in what we are capable of
eg. we can write, make sophisticated tools etc.

The most important difference is the fact that other creatures are not accountable for their actions .. we are !

Well, whatever. Except for the Baha'i Faith saying that animals have "animal spirits" we completely agree.

 

[Truthseeker]

But that is just an unsupported claim that adds an extra level of unnecessary complexity to the system.
We know the electro-chemical activity in the brain is "consciousness". We know that it is a natural process. We also know that we can manipulate consciousness by manipulating the physical brain. So where does the"soul" fit in?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness#:~:text=The hard problem of consciousness,integrate information, and so forth.

The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining why and how humans have qualia[note 1] or phenomenal experiences.[2] This is in contrast to the "easy problems" of explaining the physical systems that give us and other animals the ability to discriminate, integrate information, and so forth. These problems are seen as relatively easy because all that is required for their solution is to specify the mechanisms that perform such functions.[3][4] Philosopher David Chalmers writes that even once we have solved all such problems about the brain and experience, the hard problem will still persist.[3]

The existence of a "hard problem" is controversial. It has been accepted by philosophers of mind such as Joseph Levine,[5] Colin McGinn,[6] and Ned Block[7] and cognitive neuroscientists such as Francisco Varela,[8] Giulio Tononi,[9][10] and Christof Koch.[9][10] However, its existence is disputed by philosophers of mind such as Daniel Dennett,[11] Massimo Pigliucci,[12] Thomas Metzinger, Patricia Churchland,[13] and Keith Frankish,[14] and cognitive neuroscientists such as Stanislas Dehaene,[15] Bernard Baars,[16] Anil Seth,[17] and Antonio Damasio.[18]

In more simple terms, the hard problem is why do we have conscious experiences? Of course as you can see there is a dispute about this, but the simple fact that there is no proven theory about why we have conscious experiences. As a Baha'i I believe that is where the soul comes in.

Just another claim with nothing to support it, and it adds nothing to our knowledge of the process.

Not to your knowledge, of course.

What's the difference between a spirit and a soul?

An animal spirit, according to the Baha'i Faith, doesn't have all the attributes of God. The soul does.

What attributes, and how does it reflect them, and what does "reflect" mean in this context?

The attributes of God include loving-kindness, compassion, mercy, justice, truthfulness, trustworthiness, etc. Potentially we can manifest those attributes, which in Baha'i speak is same as reflect those attributes. But we have a long way to go!

What? Of course animals have free will! (ie. the ability to choose either x or y when both are available).

Yes, but that choice is predetermined according to Baha'i. You are free to disagree.

 

[Truthseeker]

Surely this contradicts the claims of Bahaullah's infallibility. They should be entirely unambiguous, with only one possible interpretation. Why would the infallible messenger of god produce anything less?

This is how many Christians think. You seem to have acquired their minsdset. There are multiple meanings to the same text.

 

[Truthseeker]

No, I am. Despite what some on here might assume, I am genuinely concerned about everyone's wellbeing. The responses of some on here make me worry about them.

A Baha'i is not supposed to do what I did to you yesterday. I apologize.

Again, not so. One of my aims is to help people think more rationally, to be more critical of their beliefs, to not just blindly follow dogma.

I am following a Messenger of God, not dogma.

Dogma: a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church.

A little limited. This can apply to any religion, not just Christianity. What is boils down to is that dogma is defined by fallible men which is always a sect of that religion.

I do think critically, though I don't expect you to believe that. A rule of thumb is that each person thinks the other person of another religion or of a religion in your case in not thinking critically.

But sorry I said you want us to look bad. I shouldn't have said that. That violates what I should do as a Baha'i.

So when Bahaullah said that you must accept everything he said, even if it is nonsensical, you disagree and reject that requirement?

I've covered this before now. We interpret the Writings or scripture if you like differently, and the text has multiple meanings.

 

[Truthseeker]

People who try to make others look bad only do that to make themselves look good.
It's basic psychology. It's also in the Writings.

5: O SON OF DUST! Verily I say unto thee: Of all men the most negligent is he that disputeth idly and seeketh to advance himself over his brother. Say, O brethren! Let deeds, not words, be your adorning.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 23-24

44: O COMPANION OF MY THRONE! Hear no evil, and see no evil, abase not thyself, neither sigh and weep. Speak no evil, that thou mayest not hear it spoken unto thee, and magnify not the faults of others that thine own faults may not appear great; and wish not the abasement of anyone, that thine own abasement be not exposed. Live then the days of thy life, that are less than a fleeting moment, with thy mind stainless, thy heart unsullied, thy thoughts pure, and thy nature sanctified, so that, free and content, thou mayest put away this mortal frame, and repair unto the mystic paradise and abide in the eternal kingdom for evermore.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 37

What about this Hidden Word:

26. O SON OF BEING!
How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me.
(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

I violated that yesterday! I realize that now. We should not reflect on other people's character here.

 

[KWED]

No, and that is the problem, people taking what we say, thinking they know what we meant, and creating a strawman.

*sigh* one more time...

We are not telling you what you meant, we are telling what you said.
What you said might not be what you meant, but as none of us are mind readers, we can only go by what you say, not what you think.
Understand?

(And it's yet another example of many apologists on here being unable to grasp simple concepts )

What some atheists such as @KWED totally miss is that NONE of this is about who is right and who is wrong. It is all about what we believe, which can never be proven right or wrong. When people make the discussion about who is right and who is wrong that is ego and the need to be right.

So you accept that you could be wrong about Bahaullah and that he could have been dishonest or delusional, rather than an actual messenger of an actual god.

(This is where you contradict yourself and insist that he was definitely, without doubt AAMOAAG, and definitely not delusional or dishonest)

 

[Trailblazer]

What about this Hidden Word:

26. O SON OF BEING!
How couldst thou forget thine own faults and busy thyself with the faults of others? Whoso doeth this is accursed of Me.
(Baha'u'llah, The Arabic Hidden Words)

Yes, that Hidden Word also applies, but I picked the one that was most relevant for the issue I was describing.

I violated that yesterday! I realize that now. We should not reflect on other people's character here.

Maybe not, but nobody's perfect. Don't be so hard on yourself.

 

[Truthseeker]

The Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Assyrians all had civilization grander than the Israelites. But, in the Bible, ii is said that their religious beliefs were false.

It's not about how "grand" the civilization is, but the moral level of the civilization, and the level of true enlightment. Of course the Israelite civilization went downhill over time.

Then the same thing with the Greeks and Romans and Christianity. What a greater impact on the world? The Greeks and Romans or Christianity? And the Christian world that did develop, with the Roman Church and Pope leading it, I wouldn't use it as a positive example of what the teachings of Jesus could accomplish.

Yes, over time the Popes led a degraded civilization compared to what they had at first. The moral level of civilization goes down over time for all religions.

 

[KWED]

There is no halfway place to meet

Yes there is. I'm there.

because if A and B are true then C is false and if C is true then A and B are false.

NONE of this discussion is about who is right and who is wrong.
Religious beliefs can never be proven right or wrong.
Religious beliefs are about what we believers 'believe' is true.

So, as you accept that none of the positions can be proven or disproven, you therefore accept that all of them are possible.
That is the "halfway place".
Welcome!

 

[Trailblazer]

*sigh* one more time...

We are not telling you what you meant, we are telling what you said.
What you said might not be what you meant, but as none of us are mind readers, we can only go by what you say, not what you think.
Understand?

I understand. All words that people write form sentences that require interpretation on the part of the reader.
You go by what you think people meant by what they said, which is not always what they actually meant.

Only they know what they meant, you don't know. So when they say "I meant X" that is what they meant.

So you accept that you could be wrong about Bahaullah and that he could have been dishonest or delusional, rather than an actual messenger of an actual god

It has nothing to do about me being right or wrong. It is all about what I believe is true.
Why it matters to you what I believe is what you should be asking yourself. I could not care less what you believe or disbelieve.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes there is. I'm there.

You are there but I am not there. I do not live in a halfway place.

So, as you accept that none of the positions can be proven or disproven, you therefore accept that all of them are possible.
That is the "halfway place".

I do not care what is possible, I only care what is actually true.
I know what is true because I have proven it to myself over the course of 52 years.
I have no need to prove it to anyone else.

 

[KWED]

I never said that.

Oh yes you did!

 

[KWED]

I have faith in the teaching and that is what I follow. Why should I go halfway away from it?

So refuse to meet me halfway.
@Trailblazer said that this is a "sure sign of ego".
To which you replied "very true".

So you admit that it is your ego that is preventing you from meeting me halfway?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Oh yes you did!
View attachment 66569

That was about you, you believe you are never wrong, no matter what, you think you know it all.

Well let me put it this way : you don't know it all

 

[Spirit of Light]

So refuse to meet me halfway.
@Trailblazer said that this is a "sure sign of ego".
To which you replied "very true".

So you admit that it is your ego that is preventing you from meeting me halfway?

No, your disbelieve is what make it impossible to meet you halfway.

 

[KWED]

There is no halfway point on these beliefs. They are either true or false, but there are many other points of discussion where we can meet people halfway.

Of course there is a halfway point, as I have explained.
You admit that your beliefs are beliefs that are unprovable. Therefore logic and reason dictate that you must accept that all of the three options (delusion, dishonesty, actual god) are possible - as I do.
You have posted several times against the ideas of insisting you must be right, and refusing to meet people halfway.

So, are you going to insist you are right and refuse to meet me halfway?
Or are you going to live up to the standards you expect others to live up to?