What do you think about other religions?

[Trailblazer]

No, I don't. I don't expect the world to ever be united. The best we can hope for is that most are mutually tolerant. And I don't see any other worldview facilitating that than humanism.

I do expect the world to be united at some point in the future, but it is going to take a very long time.
Humanism might be promoting tolerance but it is not going to unite the world because most people believe in God and are religious. That means it is going to take God or a religion to unite the world.

It can't. From the Affirmations of Humanism: "We affirm humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others. We believe in optimism rather than pessimism, hope rather than despair, learning in the place of dogma, truth instead of ignorance, joy rather than guilt or sin, tolerance in the place of fear, love instead of hatred, compassion over selfishness, beauty instead of ugliness, and reason rather than blind faith or irrationality. We believe in the fullest realization of the best and noblest that we are capable of as human beings."

I agree that humanism as a realistic alternative to theologies of despair and ideologies of violence and as a source of rich personal significance and genuine satisfaction in the service to others. Years ago, I had a friend on my forum who was a humanist. He liked the Baha'i Faith so much that he put a lot of information about Baha'u'llah on his website. He said he would become a Baha'i but he cannot believe in God and I totally respected that. Later, I heard on a forum that there are Baha'is who do not believe in God, although I have never met any. It is true that many people become Baha'is because of the high ideals Baha'u'llah espoused, not for belief in God. Initially, that is why I became a Baha'i. Only many years later did I really start to think about God.

If those things haven't happened, you can't justifiably call your prophet or anybody else the messiah. If he doesn't do it in his lifetime, he's not going to be doing it from the grave, so, not the messiah. If somebody else does it later, there's your messiah.

My belief that Baha'u'llah was the messiah is not contingent upon the Bible prophecies being fulfilled.
I am not claiming He was the messiah, I simply believe He was.

As I said before, there is nothing in the Old Testament that says that the messiah will do those things that will fulfill the prophecies within his lifetime. Nowhere does it say the messiah himself will do them at all. That is not in the Old Testament, it is just a belief that Jews hold.

No need. Religious prophecy isn't persuasive. I've explained what prophecy requires to suggest prescience - specificity and the prediction of something unlikely (there's a little more, but that's enough for present purposes). Scientific prophecy meets that standard, but not religious prophecy.

That makes no sense to me because it is likely that the prophecy will be fulfilled if the Bible is correct.
Why would it be unlikely? Can you give me an example of something that is unlikely to occur?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Humanism might be promoting tolerance but it is not going to unite the world because most people believe in God and are religious. That means it is going to take God or a religion to unite the world.

Nothing will unite the world. Successfully promoting tolerance in the greatest proportion is the best one can do or hope for, and it's good enough. I've explained why gods and religions aren't the answer.

My belief that Baha'u'llah was the messiah is not contingent upon the Bible prophecies being fulfilled.

Then you're on your own. The concept is Hebrew and originates in Hebrew prophecy.

Can you give me an example of something that is unlikely to occur?

This is in the context of prophecy, especially biblical prophecy. Unless they are specific, prophecy can't be of earthquakes or war or the fall of kingdoms, which are so common, they pepper history. As an example of specificity that makes a prediction unlikely, I've told you about a movie called "Frequency" in which Dennis Quaid's son living in the future tells his father living in the past the outcome of game five of what is for the father the as yet unfinished 1969 World Series from 1998 using a ham radio in order to convince his father that he really knows his father's future. Here's what the son said to the father:

"Well, game five was the big one. It turned in the bottom of the 6th. We were down 3-0. Cleon Jones gets hit on the foot - left a scuffmark on the ball. Clendenon comes up. The count goes to 2 and 2. High fastball. He nailed it. Weis slammed a solo shot in the 7th to tie. Jones and Swoboda scored in the 8th. We won, Pop."

Then the father sees it all play out live on a TV in a bar. Once one rules out a taped delay broadcast of the game, that's convincing. Why? Because it is very specific and predicted something very unlikely. Biblical prophecy lacks that specificity, without which, it is very human and mundane.

That makes no sense to me because it is likely that the prophecy will be fulfilled if the Bible is correct.

I can agree with that, but that is not your position. You've gone further and concluded that this is true. Interesting that you call the Bible correct but ignore its messianic prophecies except to borrow the name.

 

[CG Didymus]

Then you're on your own. The concept is Hebrew and originates in Hebrew prophecy.

Let's invent a prophesy that fits with what actually happened... The Jewish Messiah, and the Kalki Avatar, the Return of Jesus the Christ, the Maitreya Buddha and the other promised ones all showed up in Persia, all as one person. That person gets thrown in jail and is exiled. He ends up in Palestine and dies there. But he wrote a lot of things that told us who he was and what we need to do. Are there any prophecies that match that?

 

[wandering peacefully]

Let's invent a prophesy that fits with what actually happened... The Jewish Messiah, and the Kalki Avatar, the Return of Jesus the Christ, the Maitreya Buddha and the other promised ones all showed up in Persia, all as one person. That person gets thrown in jail and is exiled. He ends up in Palestine and dies there. But he wrote a lot of things that told us who he was and what we need to do. Are there any prophecies that match that?

Ridiculous

 

[CG Didymus]

Ridiculous

Of course, it's ridiculous. I think Baha'is would be better off if they completely ignored the prophecies found in the different religions. They have, they say, the teachings that can end war and bring peace and unity to the world. What are those teachings? Let's take a look at them and see if we think they'll work. If it works, who cares if it came from God or some Persian guy that believed he was the return of Christ, or how many so-called prophecies he fulfilled.

Unfortunately, what I've seen so far, I don't know if they will work. The Baha'i peace statement thinks that all nations will cooperate and disarm? In the U.S. we can't even get people to stop buying and using AK-47's.

 

[Trailblazer]

Let's invent a prophesy that fits with what actually happened... The Jewish Messiah, and the Kalki Avatar, the Return of Jesus the Christ, the Maitreya Buddha and the other promised ones all showed up in Persia, all as one person. That person gets thrown in jail and is exiled. He ends up in Palestine and dies there. But he wrote a lot of things that told us who he was and what we need to do. Are there any prophecies that match that?

You do not have to invent a prophesy that fits with what actually happened. There are already prophecies that match what has already happened.

 

[Truthseeker]

I'm letting you know everywhere I can that I sent a Zoom invitation for our usual Zoom meeting at 5:00 Pacific. I'm resorting to this since I sent out the link at about 1:30 Pacific time, which is late.

 

[Trailblazer]

Nothing will unite the world. Successfully promoting tolerance in the greatest proportion is the best one can do or hope for, and it's good enough. I've explained why gods and religions aren't the answer.

Promoting tolerance in the greatest proportion is the best one can do or hope for right now, and it's good enough for now.
Nobody except God knows what the future holds or how it will come about.

Then you're on your own. The concept is Hebrew and originates in Hebrew prophecy.

I did not say that the Bible prophecies have not been fulfilled. I meant that my belief that Baha'u'llah was the messiah is not contingent upon looking at the Bible prophecies to see if they have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah. On the other hand, if they had not been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, then Baha'u'llah could not be who He claimed to be, so it is pretty important that they were fulfilled by Him.

This is in the context of prophecy, especially biblical prophecy. Unless they are specific, prophecy can't be of earthquakes or war or the fall of kingdoms, which are so common, they pepper history.

Even if they are common occurrences, they can still be a legitimate prophecy. They just won't be specific enough to draw any useful conclusions from them. There are prophecies such as Micah 7:12 that are specific enough to be matched up with actual occurrences on earth, and the way to know if they point to the person we believe fulfilled them is by looking at the other prophecies and see if he also fulfilled them.

Prophecies are like a jigsaw puzzle. You can't just look at one prophecy and expect to get the full picture. You have to put them all together to see what the final picture is. If every puzzle piece points to one person they all fit together to make the final picture. However, the key to getting the final picture correct is interpreting the prophecies correctly. If you misinterpret one or more prophecies you will never be able to fit the puzzle pieces together to get the final picture. Instead, you will have a big mess of puzzle pieces and not know what to do with them. This is the situation I believe the Jews and the Christians find themselves in.

I can agree with that, but that is not your position. You've gone further and concluded that this is true. Interesting that you call the Bible correct but ignore its messianic prophecies except to borrow the name.

I said it is likely that the prophecy will be fulfilled if the Bible is correct, but it is more than likely, because if the Bible is correct those prophecies will have to be fulfilled at some point in time.

I do not ignore the messianic prophecies. I have concluded that the prophecies from the 'coming' of the messiah and the prophecies for the return of Christ have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, since the messiah is the return of Christ. The messianic prophecies which refer to the messianic age are in the process of being fulfilled, and they will be fulfilled during the messianic age, which began in 1852 AD and will last no less than 1000 years.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Promoting tolerance in the greatest proportion is the best one can do or hope for right now, and it's good enough for now.

It's the best humanity can ever hope for.

Nobody except God knows what the future holds or how it will come about.

That is simply untrue. It's a religious belief pulled out whenever people contradict religious dicta in order to undermine their claims, a variation on the Courtier's Reply: "The courtier's reply is a type of informal fallacy, coined by American biologist PZ Myers, in which a respondent to criticism claims that the critic lacks sufficient knowledge, credentials, or training to pose any sort of criticism whatsoever."

But many don't believe in that or any god, and so there is no mind of god to consider - just the rules of nature, and they tell us much about the future. That's their job. We discover and use them to predict outcomes. Welcome to my world, which lacks these crippling religious beliefs intended to suppress dissenting opinion, where when people reason well, others say, "Yes, I see now" even when science contradicts the faithful rather than "Your puny mind could not possibly fathom the mind of God," a variation of the Courtier's reply.

In my world, people look at the work of Copernicus and say, "Yes, I see now." But here is a typical response from a theologian when contradicted by science:

"People gave ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus] who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon. Whoever wishes to appear clever must devise some new system, which of all systems is of course the very best. This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us [Joshua 10:13] that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth." - Martin Luther

I meant that my belief that Baha'u'llah was the messiah is not contingent upon looking at the Bible prophecies to see if they have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah.

Yes, I understood that. It's based in nothing but the will to believe. What's confusing is how you suggest that fulfilling prophecy is meaningful then dismiss it as irrelevant when it contradicts your belief. Messianic prophecy tells us that Baha'u'llah is not the messiah. Nor was Jesus for the same reason.

On the other hand, if they had not been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, then Baha'u'llah could not be who He claimed to be, so it is pretty important that they were fulfilled by Him.

More confusion. Now, fulfilling prophecy is important again - necessary, in fact. What do you actually believe? It seems to mutate a lot.

Even if they are common occurrences, they can still be a legitimate prophecy. They just won't be specific enough to draw any useful conclusions from them.

Yet you seem to rely on them anyway. And that's the point of requiring specificity and unlikelihood in a prophecy before looking at it further. If all one has are vague predictions and predictions of the commonplace, you've got nothing.

Prophecies are like a jigsaw puzzle. You can't just look at one prophecy and expect to get the full picture.

Scientific prophecy contradicts you. So do fortune cookies, the fortunes being fully comprehensible one at a time. By the way, the Peking duck was delicious. And we read our fortunes, me mostly because they are in English on one side and Spanish on the other, and make a good Spanish lesson.

However, the key to getting the final picture correct is interpreting the prophecies correctly.

Meaning using motivated reasoning: "Motivated reasoning is a form of reasoning in which people access, construct, and evaluate arguments in a biased fashion to arrive at or endorse a preferred conclusion."

I do not ignore the messianic prophecies. I have concluded that the prophecies from the 'coming' of the messiah and the prophecies for the return of Christ have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah, since the messiah is the return of Christ.

You just said that you didn't use those prophecies to come to that conclusion. That's what "my belief that Baha'u'llah was the messiah is not contingent upon looking at the Bible prophecies to see if they have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah" means. Now, you say the opposite.

 

[CG Didymus]

What's confusing is how you suggest that fulfilling prophecy is meaningful then dismiss it as irrelevant when it contradicts your belief. Messianic prophecy tells us that Baha'u'llah is not the messiah. Nor was Jesus for the same reason.

I haven't responded directly to her posts for a long time. We had many arguments about "fulfilled" prophecy. I thought we had mutually agreed that anyone can make any prophecy main just about anything. Plus, I'd add that it's easy to cherry-pick verses and claim they are prophecy. It's been a while since I've looked at them, but here she goes again, making the claim that her prophet has fulfilled all the prophecies of not only Christianity but of every other religion also. Here's a quote from Daniel.

12:11 “From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days. 12 Blessed is the one who waits for and reaches the end of the 1,335 days.​

Here's how Abdul Baha' interprets Daniel 12:11-12.

Abdu'l-Bahá interprets the prophecy concerning the 1,290 days in the following terms:​

​

The beginning of this lunar reckoning is from the day of the proclamation of the prophethood of Muhammad in the country of Hijaz; and that was three years after His mission, because in the beginning the prophethood of Muhammad was kept secret, and no one knew it save Khadijah and Ibn Nawfal. After three years it was announced. And Bahá'u'lláh, in the year 1290 from the proclamation of the mission of Muhammad, caused His manifestation to be known.​

​

Note that the Master indicates that, in this instance, time is measured by the "lunar" calendar. Since the proclamation of the mission of Muhammad took place ten years prior to the Hegira, i.e., His flight from Mecca to Medina, from which date the Muslim calendar begins, the year 1290 from the proclamation of the mission of Muhammad was the year 1280 of the Hegira, or 1863-64 A.D.​

​

Here's his interpretation of the rest of the prophecy...

Now concerning the verse in Daniel, the interpretation whereof thou didst ask, namely, "Blessed is he who cometh unto the thousand three hundred and thirty five days". These days must be reckoned as solar and not lunar years. For according to this calculation a century will have elapsed from the dawn of the Sun of Truth, then will the teachings of God be firmly established upon the earth, and the Divine Light shall flood the world from the East even unto the West. Then, on this day, will the faithful rejoice! (p. 31)​

O servant of God! The afore mentioned a thousand three hundred and thirty-five years must be reckoned from the day of the flight of His Holiness Muhammad, the Apostle of God, (Hegira) salutations and blessings rest upon Him, at the close of which time the signs of the rise, the glory, the exaltation, the spread of the Word of God throughout the East and the West shall appear. (p. 31)​

​

From these Tablets it appears that:​

- The spread of the Faith throughout the world will signal the fulfilment of this prophecy.​

- The "days must be reckoned as solar and not lunar years".​

- The Tablets suggest that the prophecy is fulfilled by two different dates. The first derives from the centenary of the Declaration of Bahá'u'lláh; the second is calculated from 622 A.D. -- hence, 1963 and 1957.​

​

Shoghi Effendi associated Daniel's reference to the 1,335 days and Abdu'l-Bahá's statements about this prophecy with the centenary of the formal assumption of Bahá'u'lláh's prophetic office and the worldwide triumph of the Bahá'í Cause. He stressed that the prophecy refers to occurrences within the Bahá'í community, rather than to events in the outside world, e.g., the establishment of peace. While the Guardian clearly allied the triumph of the Faith with the successful termination of the third Teaching Plan undertaken by the believers, in his letters and those written on his behalf, three specific dates are mentioned as marking the fulfilment of Daniel's prophecy.​

2.1 1960 -- A lunar reckoning​

Concerning the Declaration of Bahá'u'lláh in Baghdad, Shoghi Effendi, in "God Passes By", page 151, wrote:​

​

---

Daniel's Prophecies Revised February 1996 Page 3​

The "hundred lunar years", destined to immediately precede that blissful consummation (1,335 days), announced by Daniel ... had commenced.​

​

One hundred years, by a "lunar reckoning", after the Declaration of Bahá'u'lláh coincides with 1960.​

2.2 1963 -- A solar reckoning​

​

He starts one when Muhammad secretly announced his mission. He starts the other in the year of the Hegira. One he uses "lunar" years, the other "solar" years. But in Daniel it says to start counting the years "From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up..."? That sounds very specific. I wonder what year that was?

But one thing for sure... How does that have anything to do with Muhammad? I don't know. Maybe TB can explain it. If not, then that's her leaders making some claims that don't sound like legitimate fulfillments of prophecy. But... since we know that can't be true, there must be a "rational" and "provable" reason why Abdul Baha' interpreted them like this. I mean other than they came out to the dates he wanted.

 

[Trailblazer]

It's the best humanity can ever hope for.

Humans can hope for whatever they want to hope for, and different people have different hopes. Whether they will get what they hope for is another matter.

That is simply untrue. It's a religious belief

It is a religious belief but that does not mean it is not true. It could be true or false. I am not claiming it is true because I cannot prove it is true. Likewise, you cannot claim it is false unless you can prove it is false.

Yes, I understood that. It's based in nothing but the will to believe.

No, my belief in Baha'u'llah is based upon the evidence that Baha'u'llah told us to look at. He never told us to look at Bible prophecies.

What's confusing is how you suggest that fulfilling prophecy is meaningful then dismiss it as irrelevant when it contradicts your belief.

I did not dismiss it is irrelevant, I only said it was not necessary in order for me to know that the claims of Baha'u'llah are true.
The prophecies that were fulfilled by Baha'u'llah do not contradict my belief, they confirm my belief.

Messianic prophecy tells us that Baha'u'llah is not the messiah. Nor was Jesus for the same reason.

Prophecy tells us that Jesus was a messiah but not the messiah of the Messianic Age. Baha'u'llah was the messiah of the Messianic Age.

26: THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST AND THE DAY OF JUDGMENT

More confusion. Now, fulfilling prophecy is important again - necessary, in fact. What do you actually believe? It seems to mutate a lot.

It is important that Baha'u'llah fulfilled the Bible prophecies because otherwise he could not claim to be the messiah. The prophecies are interesting but they are not necessary for me to believe that Baha'u'llah was the messiah since I have other evidence.

Yet you seem to rely on them anyway. And that's the point of requiring specificity and unlikelihood in a prophecy before looking at it further. If all one has are vague predictions and predictions of the commonplace, you've got nothing.

We have more than vague predictions.

Scientific prophecy contradicts you. So do fortune cookies, the fortunes being fully comprehensible one at a time.

I did not say prophecies are not comprehensible one at a time, I said we need more than one to get the full picture.
If all of the prophecies are fulfilled by one person everything fits together and gives us the full picture.

By the way, the Peking duck was delicious. And we read our fortunes, me mostly because they are in English on one side and Spanish on the other, and make a good Spanish lesson.

Well, I am sure glad you enjoyed yourself. I miss eating out at Chinese restaurants, I miss a lot of things.

Meaning using motivated reasoning: "Motivated reasoning is a form of reasoning in which people access, construct, and evaluate arguments in a biased fashion to arrive at or endorse a preferred conclusion."

If anyone is using motivated reasoning it is the Christians and Jews, since they both await a messiah that they imagine will come, a messiah who will fulfill their hopes and dreams, so they interpret the prophecies to arrive at their preferred conclusion.

You just said that you didn't use those prophecies to come to that conclusion. That's what "my belief that Baha'u'llah was the messiah is not contingent upon looking at the Bible prophecies to see if they have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah" means. Now, you say the opposite.

I explained that above. I didn't didn't use those prophecies to come to the conclusion that Baha'u'llah was the messiah because I accepted His claim to be the messiah based upon other evidence. Later, I confirmed what I already believed, when I looked at the prophecies and concluded that the prophecies from the 'coming' of the messiah and the prophecies for the return of Christ have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

No, my belief in Baha'u'llah is based upon the evidence that Baha'u'llah told us to look at.

But you also said the following:

I did not dismiss it is irrelevant, I only said it was not necessary in order for me to know that the claims of Baha'u'llah are true.

That makes the prophecies irrelevant in your choice to believe. You believe without them.

It is important that Baha'u'llah fulfilled the Bible prophecies because otherwise he could not claim to be the messiah. The prophecies are interesting but they are not necessary for me to believe that Baha'u'llah was the messiah since I have other evidence.

This is confusion to me, conflicting opinions about whether fulfilling prophecy is necessary to believe that Baha'u'llah was the messiah. I can't make you see the problems here I can only tell you that others see them, and it undermines your ethos, which refers to the meta-messages a speaker or writer sends his audience in addition to the explicit meaning of his argument, such as does he seem knowledgeable, does he seem sincere, does he seem credible, does he seem trustworthy, does he seem competent, does he show good judgment, does he seem to have a hidden agenda, is he more interested in convincing with impartial argument or persuading with emotive language or specious argumentation, and the like. You come off as confused, as holding conflicting beliefs. It isn't necessary for you to explain why you disagree. It's assumed that you do, and that the reason you would offer would be more of the same chaotic thought.

We have more than vague predictions.

I said as much. I said that you had "vague predictions and predictions of the commonplace."

Well, I am sure glad you enjoyed yourself. I miss eating out at Chinese restaurants, I miss a lot of things.

Sorry to hear that. Why don't you get out and visit one?

 

[CG Didymus]

He starts one when Muhammad secretly announced his mission. He starts the other in the year of the Hegira. One he uses "lunar" years, the other "solar" years. But in Daniel it says to start counting the years "From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up..."? That sounds very specific. I wonder what year that was?

But one thing for sure... How does that have anything to do with Muhammad? I don't know. Maybe TB can explain it. If not, then that's her leaders making some claims that don't sound like legitimate fulfillments of prophecy. But... since we know that can't be true, there must be a "rational" and "provable" reason why Abdul Baha' interpreted them like this. I mean other than they came out to the dates he wanted.

Is there a Baha'i out there that can explain this?

 

[Trailblazer]

But you also said the following:
I did not dismiss it is irrelevant, I only said it was not necessary in order for me to know that the claims of Baha'u'llah are true.
That makes the prophecies irrelevant in your choice to believe. You believe without them.

The prophecies were irrelevant to me when I was making a choice to believe since I did not even know about them 52 years ago.
I never even read one page of the Bible until about 10 years ago. So yes, I believed in Baha'u'llah without the prophecies.
However, now that I know about the prophecies I think they are relevant as supporting evidence for the claims of Baha'u'llah.

I said as much. I said that you had "vague predictions and predictions of the commonplace."

I said we have more than vague predictions, which means we have some specific predictions.

Sorry to hear that. Why don't you get out and visit one?

I do not like eating out alone.

 

[CG Didymus]

That makes the prophecies irrelevant in your choice to believe. You believe without them.

And I'm still waiting for a Baha'i to explain how Abdul Baha came up with his interpretation of Daniel 12.

 

[Trailblazer]

And I'm still waiting for a Baha'i to explain how Abdul Baha came up with his interpretation of Daniel 12.

And you are probably be going to wait a long time, since Tony has flown the coop and Duane is not around much anymore.
Maybe Duane aka @Truthseeker will take a stab at it, and he's be the best one to do so since he is a very knowledgable Baha'i.

 

[CG Didymus]

And I'm still waiting for a Baha'i to explain how Abdul Baha came up with his interpretation of Daniel 12.

This shouldn't be that hard to explain. Abdul Baha must have had a reason to say that Muhammad doing those things was the point to where we are supposed to start counting the lunar years and the solar years. What could it have been? Is there a way to "symbolically" make those dates the time that the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up? I don't think so, but Abdul Baha has to. And if he didn't explain why, then why do Baha'is accept what he said without question? What happened to personally investigating the truth?

 

[Trailblazer]

This shouldn't be that hard to explain. Abdul Baha must have had a reason to say that Muhammad doing those things was the point to where we are supposed to start counting the lunar years and the solar years. What could it have been? Is there a way to "symbolically" make those dates the time that the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up? I don't think so, but Abdul Baha has to. And if he didn't explain why, then why do Baha'is accept what he said without question? What happened to personally investigating the truth?

If we questioned why Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha said everything they said before we believed then we would never become Baha'is, kind of like you.

That said, we should question what seems important for us to believe...
@Truthseeker is the Baha'i scholar here, so he would now the answer if there is an answer we can know, although I cannot guarantee he will jump in.

 

[Muffled]

I find every one of them as ridulous as the rest.
Not one has any proof of some supernatural dictator and should be treated as the delusion they are.

I believe Sarah laughed but God proved her wrong.

 

[Muffled]

I am just going to reply to your first claim, "JWs do not proselytize" which is patently false. Explain to me why I get unsolicited handwritten letters from JWs (3 times now) trying to proselytize. JWs knock on my door, proselytizing. Your claim is ridiculous.

Having studied with the JWs I believe I can answer that. I was never told that I needed to become a JW or even a Christian. What I did find was that the teaching had a bad habit of leading down the wrong road and the JW's did not wish to explore relative verses that would have contradicted their false teaching.