What do you think about other religions?

[Muffled]

I do mostly, except for religions that try to harm , maim, or kill its followers.

I believe I only respect those that earn respect. I have very little respect for religions that choose to remain in false teaching.

 

[CG Didymus]

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?

Okay Baha'is, I've asked this before, what are the prophecies that say Jesus, the Messiah, the Maitreya, Kalki and all the others will come from Persia, get rejected, exiled and imprisoned and die? I know you use a couple of Bible verses about being exiled, but the Baha'i claim is that all the prophecies of all the major religions have been fulfilled. Using the NT, where does it say Jesus will return to? In Hindu Scriptures, where does it say the Kalki Avatar will come from and what will he do? Same with the Maitreya, what is supposed to be happening in the world before he returns? Where does he come from and what will he do?

Baha'is maybe can't invent prophecies that fit, but they can invent interpretations of cherry-picked verses that make those verses fit. But that's okay, let's see what you got.

Oh, and speaking of inventing interpretations, what about Daniel 12? Making the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up into Muhammad's declaration of prophethood and the year of the Hegira? Then making one "lunar" years and the other "solar" years? Why accept that without a solid explanation of how Abdul Baha' justifies interpreting those verses in Daniel like that?

 

[Truthseeker]

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.

No, I won't jump in. For him everything hinges on prophecies, and the approach of vainly trying to explain the interperetation of prophecies with him has been going for what seems years.

 

[Trailblazer]

No, I won't jump in. For him everything hinges on prophecies, and the approach of vainly trying to explain the interperetation of prophecies with him has been going for what seems years.

I didn't think so.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

This is directed to the respected members of all religions. There are differences between religions but Interfaith tries to look for what we have in common. Should we allow our differences to divide us or should we put aside our differences and work for the betterment of the world?

By religion I do not mean denomination or sect. I mean a different religion or philosophy such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam etc.

As a member of your faith, do you accept other religions are true or only your religion?

Does your religion promote fellowship between members of other faiths or not.

Do you ever read or study other religions within your religion.

Do you think religions can unite and accept each other. For example Jews accept Christ and Christians accept Muhammad. If not why not?

Well, as a member of the philosophy of skepticism I am weird when it comes to truth, as I am a cognitive relativist. In effect there is no single strong version of the truth to me, so I don't use truth in some sense as some people.

 

[CG Didymus]

No, I won't jump in. For him everything hinges on prophecies, and the approach of vainly trying to explain the interperetation of prophecies with him has been going for what seems years.

Oh, and speaking of inventing interpretations, what about Daniel 12? Making the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up into Muhammad's declaration of prophethood and the year of the Hegira? Then making one "lunar" years and the other "solar" years? Why accept that without a solid explanation of how Abdul Baha' justifies interpreting those verses in Daniel like that?

"Vainly"? "Everything hinges on prophesies"? If Baha'is are going to claim Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies of all the religion, I would think they could support those claims. If there were an explanation as to why Abdul Baha' could make the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up into Muhammad's declaration of prophethood and the year of the Hegira, all you'd have to do is give a reference to where it is explained.

If there isn't one, then why do Baha'is accept what Abdul Baha' says without personally investigating what he claims as being true or not? The question then becomes why do you Baha'is believe it?

But really, what did TB expect from you? If she brings up the claim that all the prophecies have been fulfilled, she should be the one that supports that claim.

 

[Trailblazer]

But really, what did TB expect from you? If she brings up the claim that all the prophecies have been fulfilled, she should be the one that supports that claim.

I am not stating that as a claim, I am stating it as a belief.
The claim that all the prophecies have been fulfilled is supported in the book Thief in the Night by William Sears.

If you do not accept his interpretations of prophecies then you don't, but that doesn't mean he is wrong. It doesn't mean he is right either, but what if he is right?

 

[Trailblazer]

If there were an explanation as to why Abdul Baha' could make the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up into Muhammad's declaration of prophethood and the year of the Hegira, all you'd have to do is give a reference to where it is explained.

If there isn't one, then why do Baha'is accept what Abdul Baha' says without personally investigating what he claims as being true or not? The question then becomes why do you Baha'is believe it?

I don't know if there is an explanation or not, but Baha'is believe it because we accept what Abdu'l-Baha wrote. If we want to personally investigate it that is our choice.

 

[CG Didymus]

Beliefs? Claims? To me there isn't a significant difference. A Baha'i or Christian believes something is true and tells people they believe it is The Truth, that's as good as claiming it to me.

Bill Sears? Adul Baha'? I would hope that Baha'is investigate their claims themselves. Right now, I see zero reason to start counting years from Muhammad's declaration and the Hegira when in Daniel it says to start it from the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up.

 

[Muffled]

Beliefs? Claims? To me there isn't a significant difference. A Baha'i or Christian believes something is true and tells people they believe it is The Truth, that's as good as claiming it to me.

Bill Sears? Adul Baha'? I would hope that Baha'is investigate their claims themselves. Right now, I see zero reason to start counting years from Muhammad's declaration and the Hegira when in Daniel it says to start it from the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up.

The year 2625 on that basis. I believe the numbers game has proven less that elucidating and even more so after Nostradamus predicted 1999.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

To be honest, I don't care what religion others practice as long as they don't try to convert me through preaching, proselytizing, or threatening me with eternal damnation in hell if I don't convert. Also, I won't try to convert them by reciting the Wiccan Rede, try to woo them by saying that my gods love them and want to save them, or shame and guilt-trip them by saying they have sinned against my gods, which has angered them, and then threaten them with eternal damnation in hell if they don't convert. In other words, I don't expect or demand that other people accept my spirituality, and I won't try to convert them by forcing it down their throat. I think other people should be free to practice whatever religion they want, but I will confront them if they continue to try to convert me after I've told them I'm not interested. Like most people on this forum, I like to participate in religious debates, even voicing criticism of my previous religion, but at the end of the day, it is up to others to decide what they believe, whether I or anyone else agrees with them.

 

[CG Didymus]

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:​

​

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...

From these Tablets it appears that:​

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​

---

Daniel's Prophecies Revised February 1996 Page 3​

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.

If Baha'is are going to claim Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies of all the religion, I would think they could support those claims. If there were an explanation as to why Abdul Baha' could make the year the daily sacrifice was abolished and the abomination that causes desolation was set up into Muhammad's declaration of prophethood and the year of the Hegira, all you'd have to do is give a reference to where it is explained.

If there isn't one, then why do Baha'is accept what Abdul Baha' says without personally investigating what he claims as being true or not? The question then becomes why do you Baha'is believe it?

Interesting that such a simple thing as to give support and references for a claim of a fulfilled prophecy by a major leader of the Baha'i Faith can't be given. Because Adul Baha' said it, Baha'is just take his word for it? No investigating to make sure what he says is true? Here was a golden opportunity to show evidence and maybe even prove that what Adul Baha said is true.

Why can't you? And why won't you? Without supplying an answer I'll have to believe that it is because the only answer Baha'is have is that because Adul Baha' said so... it is the truth and the correct interpretation.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why can't you? And why won't you? Without supplying an answer I'll have to believe that it is because the only answer Baha'is have is that because Adul Baha' said so... it is the truth and the correct interpretation.

I can't because I do not know the Bible. I cannot speak for why the other Baha'is on here can't or won't, but if it is really important to you, you can post your question on r/bahai because there are a lot more Baha'is there and many of them are very knowledgeable and eager to answer questions. Lots of non-Baha'is ask questions there and get answers.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Compared to a dead Jesus? A dead Jesus where the gospel story still says there was an empty tomb and his followers saw him and said he was indeed alive?

Maybe a resurrected messiah prevents the future messiah from being born?

 

[CG Didymus]

Maybe a resurrected messiah prevents the future messiah from being born?

Well, it's not like I believe in the literal, physical resurrection either... along with the virgin birth, the walking on water and ascending into the clouds. That would be incredible if it were all true, but I think it's very likely that it's just myths and legends to embellish the story of Jesus and make him into a God/man.

But I do believe that the NT does claim that all those things, and especially the resurrection, did happen. So, my argument with Baha'is is because they claim to believe in the NT and in Jesus and in Christianity. But they only believe what they want to about the NT. And they want a physically dead Jesus that only rose in spirit. But who knows why it is so important to them that God didn't bring Jesus back to life?

 

[Muffled]

Maybe a resurrected messiah prevents the future messiah from being born?

Normally it would be necessary for a person to be dead before a re-incarnation could take place but God is omnipresent so he could incarnate as many times as He wished.