Scenario of a prophet

[gnostic]

Here is a scenario for the 3 main Abrahamic religions.

Let's say a prophet with an angel appeared before everyone. He has news that the 3 religions have stray from their paths, so both angel and prophet are here to set things right, bringing with them a book from heaven that reveal the truth, and dispelling many of misconceptions of teachings. And there are clear signs from heaven that both angel and prophet really belong to God. And this book was indestructable and written in flame that never goes out, which would be proof that it was written by no mortal's hand.

The problem with Christianity, is that there were no other independent witness of Jesus' miracles and resurrection. We only have testimonies from the few. No Roman or Greek had reported such things at that time.

The problem with Islam is that Muhammad was the only one who saw this angel Gabriel. And there are no definite and independent proof that the Qur'an was received from God. We only have his words that it came from God.

With the LDS, the so-called gold plates which Joseph Smith had translated into the Book of Mormon, had too conveniently disappeared, and the only eye-witnesses are his friends.

The ark of convenant in Moses' time would have been great proof, because no could not touch it and live, except by some chosens to carry it around. But this also too conveniently vanished without a trace, just like the Garden of Eden.

If there are conclusive proof today from angel, prophet and genuine book from heaven, would you leave you leave the current religion you are in?

 

[BucephalusBB]

conclusive proof......genuine book

Well that says enough for me..

 

[Ori]

It would be an interesting scenario, but I believe many religions would still rubbish it as work of the Devil and so on.

 

[retrorich]

If there are conclusive proof today from angel, prophet and genuine book from heaven, would you leave you leave the current religion you are in?

How could you verify that a professed angel or prophet were what they claimed to be? How could you establish the authenticity of an alleged "book from heaven"? In the meantime, I will remain an atheist, thank you.

 

[BucephalusBB]

How could you verify that a professed angel or prophet were what they claimed to be? How could you establish the authenticity of an alleged "book from heaven"? In the meantime, I will remain an atheist, thank you.

He can't, you can only see so if the angel does. I guess you will just have to asume in this thread that it is possible..

 

[gnostic]

In the meantime, I will remain an atheist, thank you.

That was the sort of answer I was expecting from an atheist.

It would be an interesting scenario, but I believe many religions would still rubbish it as work of the Devil and so on.

That is also the sort of answer I would expect.

Ok, if a book with fiery writings on the pages itself are not good enough proof for you, then what sort of miracle would you expect?

Do you recall in the Book of Daniel, where a hand appeared out of nowhere and left writing on the wall? Would that be miracle enough for you? Christians seemed to believe healings and exorcisms, but so far many frauds have done this, so that would be good enough for me.

Unlike the Joseph Smith's disappearing gold plates, this book can be seen by all. Anyone who look into the book could read in the language of his native tongue. Would that be good enough for you?

 

[retrorich]

Do you recall in the Book of Daniel, where a hand appeared out of nowhere and left writing on the wall? Would that be miracle enough for you? Christians seemed to believe healings and exorcisms, but so far many frauds have done this, so that would be good enough for me.

Unlike the Joseph Smith's disappearing gold plates, this book can be seen by all. Anyone who look into the book could read in the language of his native tongue. Would that be good enough for you?

Not even close.

 

[gnostic]

:biglaugh: @ retrorich

Actually, what you have quoted from me, was actually directed at Orichalcum. :tsk: But I will still stick your reply into the book. :bow:

 

[YmirGF]

An interesting hypothetical Gnostic. Let me get this straight.
Angel appears to a Prophet with a cosmic paperback tucked under his wing. They go on tour and show the book to anyone who wants to see. What onlookers see, translates into their native tongue. Hmm. An authentic angel eh. Hmmm. A book with pretty fire font. Hmmm.

I have to admit, the angel would be somewhat impressive. Wings or none?
The book is another story. I guess my conversion would depend on what the book was saying. IF I did not like much what the story was, I may very well hold out for the inevitable sequel.

 

[gnostic]

The book is another story. I guess my conversion would depend on what the book was saying. IF I did not like much what the story was, I may very well hold out for the inevitable sequel.

I would hold out too.

Actually, my topic is actually directed at theists - Christians, Muslims and Jews. I am wondering if they would belief these miracles, new prophet, and new book, today. Would they continue the way they are going, and continue to squabble on which is a true religion?

As I said in the opening post, the new book would set thing right, since centuries have passed and many have strayed from the paths.

Personally, I don't believe in heaven/hell, angels/demons, God/Satan...at least not yet. I need more proofs than just some handful of old scriptures and blind faith.

But from what I read and learn, this Abrahamic god is not someone I would trust.

 

[Buttons*]

But from what I read and learn, this Abrahamic god is not someone I would trust.

I feel the same way...

 

[Karl R]

He has news that the 3 religions have stray from their paths,

This is news?

so both angel and prophet are here to set things right, bringing with them a book from heaven that reveal the truth, and dispelling many of misconceptions of teachings. And there are clear signs from heaven that both angel and prophet really belong to God.

If there are conclusive proof today from angel, prophet and genuine book from heaven, would you leave you leave the current religion you are in?

I'd approach the situation with skepticism, but I would also consider the possibility that the prophet & angel were genuine. I would be particularly interested in the content of the message.

 

[robtex]

I wish more theists would chime in on this thread. I think for most if not just about all of them faith is a matter of "what feels right" to them as opposed to evidence or proof. It is a common misconception by many non-theists that theists arrived at their beliefs by intrepreting what they precieved as "proof" or "evidence". If that thought is true it is irrelevant if some angel came out of the sky with proof because in the long run, proof is not what determines ones faith instead feeling is. If the angel could invoke a feeling of inpiration or elicit a strong emotional response that might be a better convesion tool than tangable evidence.

 

[lilithu]

If there are conclusive proof today from angel, prophet and genuine book from heaven, would you leave you leave the current religion you are in?

The crux of your argument and you question lies in the assumption that only that which can be externally observed and independantly verified is "true." To quote Emerson:
"Is the teaching of Christ less effective now than it was when first his mouth was opened? The emphasis of facts and persons in my thought has nothing to do with time. And so, always, the soul's scale is one; the scale of the senses and the understanding is another. Before the revelations of the soul, Time, Space, and Nature shrink away." (from The Over-Soul)

I know truth from my conscience, my soul, my connection with the Divine. When I see beauty, my soul is moved. When I see kindness, my soul is moved. When I see injustice, my soul is incensed. That which I believe to be true I believe to be true because my soul/my conscience says it is so. I need no external "conclusive proof." Nor is any external proof sufficient. Ultimately, God does not talk to us through a book, nor past historical records, nor even divine messenger. Because ultimately, each of us verifies the truth thru our own consicence. Even if some "angel" appeared in front of me dressed in nothing but flames, even if he were objectively verifiable and clearly powerful, I would not recognize his words as the truth if those words went against my own conscience. That is (I believe) where God's living voice is. So if I listened to an external force, no matter how compelling, over my own conscience, that would be idolatry. It matters not whether you are Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, atheist... this is and has been the only true religion.

 

[gnostic]

I'd approach the situation with skepticism, but I would also consider the possibility that the prophet & angel were genuine. I would be particularly interested in the content of the message.

I would be sceptical too. I am, however, willing to learn. I have been searching for answers, because the religions as it is today, is not good enough. I can't follow any scripture on blind faith. Proving the existence of spirit, like an angel appearing for all to see, and not just to prophet, like claims from Muhammad and Joseph Smith, is not valid and definite proof.

That which I believe to be true I believe to be true because my soul/my conscience says it is so. I need no external "conclusive proof." Nor is any external proof sufficient. Ultimately, God does not talk to us through a book, nor past historical records, nor even divine messenger. Because ultimately, each of us verifies the truth thru our own consicence.

The truth is that the bible had never satisfied me.

If you read some of the biblical events, and the miracles that have taken place, you would find that they are no more convincing than mythology from Sumer, Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome. There are far older myths in Sumer and Akkad (Babylonia) that tell of the Creation and the Flood; and there are some striking similarities between what is found between Mesopotamian myths and the Genesis. The original Noah was Ziusudra (Sumerian), who was lated named Atrahasis or Ut-napishta (Akkadian-Babylonian). What is now called the Eridu Genesis showed Ziusudra surviving the Flood in the ark with his family.

The Genesis forming part of the Hebrew Torah, as one of 5 books that was attributed to Moses, was composed until over a thousand years later. If you are to believe that tales of time before Abraham was handed down from generation to generation (oral tradition) until Moses' time, and if you are to believe the Genesis literally, then you would have notice that Abraham (possibly flourished in the 1800 BC) had come out of Babylonia, in the city of Ur. Mesopotamia at that time of Abraham, had ancient religion and long oral tradition. Sumerian language ceased to exist as spoken language by 2000, after the fall of 3rd Dynasty of Ur. The Akkadian language had taken over Mesopotamia as language of choice, this Akkadian diverge into 2 different dialects, Assyrian in the north and Babylonian in the south. By Abraham's time, the most prominent city was Babylon. Where did the Hebrew creation myth come from? You could say (this is speculation) that Abraham brought the tale of creation and flood out of Mesopotamia. From oral tradition from Abraham to Moses, the Hebrew version would have changed over that period of time, so that instead of Ziusudra or Atrahasis, there is Noah.

The creation of man in the Genesis resembled a couple of Sumerian legends, where humans was created from soil or clay, is far older than the biblical Genesis of Adam and Eve.

Even Jesus' resurrection is not original. The Egyptian myth of Osiris is one of resurrection.

Sorry, I've gotten sidetracked. But the point is that I don't trust the bible supernatural events any more than I would from mythology of that regions of the Middle East.

There are no proof of any writing before Moses' time. There is only the possibility of oral tradition.

 

[Harvster]

Do you recall in the Book of Daniel, where a hand appeared out of nowhere and left writing on the wall? Would that be miracle enough for you? Christians seemed to believe healings and exorcisms, but so far many frauds have done this, so that would be good enough for me.

What is unfortunate is that faith in these things have diminished dramatically throughout the last century. At the begining to mid 1900's there were miricles such as these but i'm unsure whether they were documented in newspapers or not. This means that you have to believe the stories that people who were there told.

One such instance was in the mid 1900's a church was reported, by a concerned local, to the fire department to be on fire. Of course they responed immediately as a service was in progress. The fire depatment arrived, unbeknown to the worshipers inside, and started trying to put the fire out. After trying for some time and being unable to put out the fire that was engulfing the entire church they looked closer and noticed that nothing of the church was being burnt or destroyed. Seeing this they were astonished and proceeded into the church unharmed by the flames and saw the people inside worshiping oblivious to what was happening outside.

On the act of healings proformed by frauds, I would like to see one of these frauds make a leg grow.

BTW no I wouldn't leave my current religion if an angel came with a firey book as it would only confirm what I already know God existis and the Bible was correct.

 

[Popeyesays]

Wordsof "fire", huh? Well such flames could not be natural or the book would be consumed, so the flames must be metaphorical.

"Through the power of the words He hath uttered the whole of the human race can be illumined with the light of unity, and the remembrance of His Name is able to set on fire the hearts of all men, and burn away the veils that intervene between them and 287 His glory. One righteous act is endowed with a potency that can so elevate the dust as to cause it to pass beyond the heaven of heavens. It can tear every bond asunder, and hath the power to restore the force that hath spent itself and vanished..."
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 286)

"If he be kindled with the fire of His love, if he forgoeth all created things, the words he uttereth shall set on fire them that hear him. Verily, thy Lord is the Omniscient, the All-Informed. Happy is the man that hath heard Our voice, and answered Our call. He, in truth, is of them that shall be brought nigh unto Us."
(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 334)

"We have ere this uttered these sublime words: Let them that bear allegiance to this Wronged One be even as a raining cloud in moments of charity and benevolence and as a blazing fire in restraining their base and appetitive natures."
(Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, p. 94)

"As thou comest to comprehend the essence of these divine mysteries, thou wilt grasp the purpose of God, the divine Charmer, the Best-Beloved. Thou wilt regard the words and the deeds of that almighty Sovereign as one and the same; in such wise that whatsoever thou dost behold in His deeds, the same wilt thou find in His sayings, and whatsoever thou dost read in His sayings, that wilt thou recognize in His deeds. Thus it is that outwardly such deeds and words are the fire of vengeance unto the wicked, and inwardly the waters of mercy unto the righteous. Were the eye of the heart to open, it 58 would surely perceive that the words revealed from the heaven of the will of God are at one with, and the same as, the deeds that have emanated from the Kingdom of divine power."
(Baha'u'llah, The Kitab-i-Iqan, p. 57)

""Know thou that every ear which hearkeneth unto His 99 Words with true faith shall be immune from the fire. Thus the believer, through his recognition of Him will appreciate the transcendent character of His heavenly Words, will whole-heartedly choose Him over others, and will refuse to incline his affections towards those who disbelieve in Him."
(The Bab, Selections from the Writings of the Bab, p. 98)

A burning Bush unconsumed by the flames was a symbol of the presence of God to Moses. But Moses had to rely on the power of His words alone to convince others to follow Him. Jesus had no burning book to mark Him a true Messenger of God. Neither did Muhammad have a constant miracle and the signature of God hanging over Him to convince His followers of the truth of His words.

Why should things be so markedly easier for a different generation and a different Messenger? God is Justice. What would be the justice in treating another generation with such favortism.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Nimaj]

I would ask this prophet in a fluent foreign tongue to state the name of the lord in my native tongue. I would also ask him what the payment for sin is. His answers to these questions would determine wheather I left my faith behind to follow him. If he told me that I did not need to be sanctified for my sins, I would turn my back and walk away. That would make him a false prophet. I might also see if he winced at the mention of the name of Jesus, then (should I have the liberty) rebuke him in the name of Jesus. If I could not cast him out, I would still turn my back on him. Should he tell me that various denominations/sects of the three abrahamic religions have gone astray, to him I would say "Where have you been for 2 1/2 thousand years?" Honestly, I probably wouldn't listen to him at all.

 

[Scuba Pete]

What if I belong to a non-prophet organization???

 

[Popeyesays]

What if I belong to a non-prophet organization???

Then you have to have all your legal documents or the Infernal Revenue Service will get you.

Regards,
Scott