Why should a Christian even look into Islam as a Possible true Faith?

[InvestigateTruth]

Yes, the difference between objective and subjective.

When I say, "I cannot prove it to others but, it is proved to me", I mean it takes too much to prove it to others. It took me several years to investigate and be proved to me. I cannot spend to share that much information, even if someone is truly and sincerely willing to investigate, let alone most people are not serious in knowing all that.

Where I pointed out your questions are along the lines of “the outsider test for faith”,….
the trick is to as objectively as posible look at your own faith as though you have not already accepted it; more like someone from “outside” would view it.

that is absolutely true.

People tend to be much more objective in their assessment of “other faiths” and fail to understand their subjective confirmation biases when assessing their own faith.
It kind of the whole point of “the outsiders test of faith”.

that is very much true.

There, in my opinion, is your first mistake.
Why make either assumption?

even in science or math or Geomatry, we can first make an assumption, then later prove that assumption was a correct assumption. Nothing is wrong with that approach.

Why assume it can be true before any objective evidence indicates that it may be?

Because in that approach I can eventually show the assumption was a true assumption.

Why claim to “know it is definitely false”?

because "to claim to know" anything before a fair investigation, will not result in a correct conclusion. It is like, making a decision already, and just working toward that goal.

Wouldn’t the better alternative, be to not assume either until such time as some objective evidence comes along to determine if one or the other is likely true?

sure, that is the best way. To start from a neutral point. But, in practice, it is one of the most difficult things to do. One needs to become clean from all he has heard or learned, and taken as true, and start from a neutral point.

Without objective evidence otherwise, how did you determine your own question of…..

The truth, is like the Sun, behind a thousand thick veils. Eyes cannot see it, untill the veils are removed. The veils are those false learnings current among mankind, which is taken as true. Once those veils are removed, truth is manifested. Is this, a subjective evidence approach?

 

[Link]

No body should assume anything.
Making beliefs based on assumptions, and considering them as truth, is a wrong idea.


I cannot prove it to others. But it is proved to me. There is a difference. Only I can help others start seeing it is true, if they are willing to consider it could be true. That is what I meant by assuming. By "assuming" I mean, assuming it can be true, rather than, starting with the position that, "I already know it is definitely false"



I dont think they can be proven they are true now, unless one have proved it to himself that the Bahai Faith is True.


I have considered these questions. Then after investigating without bias, i came to conclusion that the Bahai Faith is true.

I believe if anyone considers Bahai Faith as even possible and has read Quran, they are probably the worse type of humans in terms of deceiving oneself about God and thinking evil of him. In my view, this is a next level of lying to oneself. This is because you have to believe God is really deceptive and says almost everything in double meaning which is a logical fallacy per Philosophers, and that it always the least by first impression meaning that God means. This is evil in my book, it makes God into the worse communicator and purposely tries to misguide people. Rather I see the examples and parables he puts, all it needs is a little fear of God and the book becomes clear. The problem is people play games with the Quran and do not let it contextualize itself. The people will argue with the Mahdi (a) but then the hadiths also show people will then come to the views of Quran after turning the Quran to their views.

God could've been clearer in Quran, but it's clear enough. All it takes is some fear of God and the wonders open up.

I don't believe Bahai Faith is possible with reading Quran and fear of God.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I doubt you realize how your analogy actually works against your idea.

No, i dont see how that works against my idea.
Consider, a particular religion, which its adherents consider that religion to be the only truth, and the final truth.
This is like saying, the Sun came, and never comes again. But the Sun, rises again and again, each day. One Day, it is called Monday, another Day it is called Tuesday. Monday is different than Tuesday, yet, the same Sun appeared in both days, even though conditions are different.
Take this analogy and apply it to the Religions. One Day, Moses came. Another Day Jesus Came. They came in different Ages, thus, what they said is not the same due to the conditions. However, it was the same Sun, meaning the same God who was speaking.

Sort of the same questions I had to your OP.
Why stop there?
Why start there?

valid questions. We need to start from somewhere. You tell, from where should be started?

If you are going to compare things according to the conditions of time why start at sunrise and end at sunset?

Let me given you another analogy.
Remember you said, there are contradictions between these Religions, thus they cannot be all true.

here is another analogy. One day, a man who is sick, is visited by Doctor. He gives certain medicine and instructions to treat and cure the disease. Another time, another man, visits the doctor. The doctor gives some medicines and instruction to treat and cure his disease.
do you think, the medicines and instructions that, the Doctor gave at each time is the same?
of course Not. The conditions and the disease were different, thus, each required a unique treatment.
now, apply this to different Religions that appeared at different times and locations.
if, the same God was talking, do you expect, that God, gives the same medicines?
I dont think so. This is why, just because there are differences between different religions, it does not mean, they are not from the same Doctor (God). He makes a different formula evertime, according to the conditions of the people, the message is given.

remember, I spoke about "Veils" in my previous post, and said there are a thousand veils, that is preventing people from seeing the truth?
well, here was one of the examples of the veils: "these religions are different from each other, so, they cannot be all true", but now seeing with the view I gave, wouldn't it remove this particular veil?
just imagine there are a thousand veils to be removed. How long will it take to remove them all?

What happened to everything at night.
What happens at another location on earth where it’s Wednesday for you and Tuesday for there?

i think i made this more clear now.

All of which is merely manmade systems (similar to religions) to understand local conditions of a far greater whole concerning the rotation of the earth, where neither Tuesday (at one location) nor Wednesday (at another location) are special in any way.

See. Here you already have a biased view. It is not neutral as you suggested before. You are saying "all the religions are manmade systems". It means, you already claim to know. But , what I am suggesting is, if one thousand veils are removed, you would see the truth. There are 999 more to go

 

[InvestigateTruth]

I believe if anyone considers Bahai Faith as even possible and has read Quran, they are probably the worse type of humans in terms of deceiving oneself about God and thinking evil of him. In my view, this is a next level of lying to oneself. This is because you have to believe God is really deceptive and says almost everything in double meaning which is a logical fallacy per Philosophers, and that it always the least by first impression meaning that God means. This is evil in my book, it makes God into the worse communicator and purposely tries to misguide people. Rather I see the examples and parables he puts, all it needs is a little fear of God and the book becomes clear. The problem is people play games with the Quran and do not let it contextualize itself. The people will argue with the Mahdi (a) but then the hadiths also show people will then come to the views of Quran after turning the Quran to their views.

God could've been clearer in Quran, but it's clear enough. All it takes is some fear of God and the wonders open up.

I don't believe Bahai Faith is possible with reading Quran and fear of God.

Well, this thread is not so much about Bahai Faith.
The last post i put for you, concentrates on Bible, and how you get from Bible to Quran clearly.
I set forth a number of questions and points. You did not reply to any of them. Why not? If you could get from The Bible to the Quran, through establishing a fair standatd way, and logic, then you can assurely be able to get from the Quran to Aghdas.

 

[Link]

Well, this thread is not so much about Bahai Faith.
The last post i put for you, concentrates on Bible, and how you get from Bible to Quran clearly.
I set forth a number of questions and points. You did not reply to any of them. Why not? If you could get from The Bible to the Quran, through establishing a fair standatd way, and logic, then you can assurely be able to get from the Quran to Aghdas.

The Bible has some distortion per Quran. You can't get from the current Bible to the Quran without seeing it distorted. You can see clues of the truth and prophecy, but you have to fix the contradictions and fabrications which Quran does.

Mohammad (s) in the Torah is made ambiguous due to the distortion of the station of Ismail (a) and the fabrication made that he is not a son of Sarah (a). The whole thing is made up even though many hadiths will confirm the story, it's definitely made up per Quran.

And furthermore, the meaning of leadership chosen by God is distorted, and so the twelve princes in Ismail (a) offspring can be seen as regular princes, or sons of a king (Ismail twelve sons), and have barely any meaning. Why not when Saul (the first one) appointed by Samuel (a) deviates per the Tanakh.

Why not when Aaron (a) and the first Mariam (a) argue with Moses (a) about his leadership and want it for themselves? Why not when Solomon (a) dies a pagan?

If God can mean leadership selected by his covenant includes people who die disbelievers and polytheist as did Solomon (a), then this leaves no room for the prophecy of twelve to be clear.

Furthermore, the words for tribes is branches often, and to get the right translations everywhere for people is difficult. The twelve gates are filled with twelve branches among children of Israel, not the tribes. It means the twelve successors. And every founder has twelve gates to correspond to that of heaven.

Is this easily seen? No. The position of an Ahlulbayt is not easily seen either because God goes 180 degrees against his promise regarding the Ahlulbayt of Haroun (a) and offspring in Haroun (a). This is because they participated in polytheism.

The knot on Moses (a) tongue and the one who God will send has context of Ismail (a) and covenant in his offspring, and the one like Moses (a) should be seen that Moses (a) is a founder of a nation, and that twelve successors follow, but all that is distorted.

And the one who untied the knot on Moses' (a) tongue is Imam Mohammad Al-Baqir (a) and this what is meant by Rasool (s) saying he is known as al-Baqir in the Torah. This why I said Tas seen meem refers to Mohamad Al-Baqir (a) as well.

Aaron (a) is the TRUE successor of Musa (a), not Yushua ibn Noon, though you will find more hadiths favoring the latter as successor then the former, but this is another distortion. Haroun (a) being older then Musa (a) is another distortion.

Only when you understand Jesus (a) position he preached was occupied by Moses (a) and his successors up to him, then it will become clear, it's not that Jesus (a) becomes this ultra figure which the religion of God changes to center around. So to see the Gospels properly, you need to see the Torah distorted, the books after some of it true, some of it false. Otherwise, you can't see what Jesus (a) is saying to apply universally to all chosen ones.

So I'm saying Bible as is, you can't get to Quran through it, unless you fix the mistakes it has.

But to see those mistakes fixed, you have to use reasoning, and see religion of God in constant way. The Quran does show how to think in that way.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

The Bible has some distortion per Quran.

You can't get from the current Bible to the Quran without seeing it distorted.

Are you saying that, God had included some clear verses about Muhammad, so, the Jews and Christians expect Muhammad, and be able to rrecognize Him at the time of His Manifestation? Are you saying that, there were clear verses from God about Muhammad in the Bible, but as Christians and Jews made changes into the Bible, thus, those clear verses regarding Muhammad are distorted, and is making it very difficult to see Muhammad in the Bible?

(Well, first, do you understand that, you need to prove this idea, with absolute certainty, otherwise your whole belief is nothing but based on an assumption?)

But, let's set asside that for now.

If this is indeed the case, then answer this question:

why God did not protect such clear verses in the Bible, that He had originally intended to be a guide for Jews and Christians to Get to the Quran?

was God incapable of protecting them?

Does that make sense to you, the omnipotent God, who is Omnipresent, were unable to protect even His own words, that He had meant to be a guide for people, so, they get to the Quran from the Bible?

 

[Link]

why God did not protect such clear verses in the Bible, that He had originally intended to be a guide for Jews and Christians to Get to the Quran?

was God incapable of protecting them?

Does that make sense to you, the omnipotent God, who is Omnipresent, were unable to protect even His own words, that He had meant to be a guide for people, so, they get to the Quran from the Bible?

Why didn't he protect all holy books from all Prophets (a) in all times? That's a good question. However, he didn't protect them, and people were entrusted to do so.

If all holy books all around the world were all protected, it would be easier to all agree now, wouldn't it? So why didn't God do it?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I believe if anyone considers Bahai Faith as even possible and has read Quran, they are probably the worse type of humans in terms of deceiving oneself about God and thinking evil of him. In my view, this is a next level of lying to oneself. This is because you have to believe God is really deceptive and says almost everything in double meaning which is a logical fallacy per Philosophers, and that it always the least by first impression meaning that God means. This is evil in my book, it makes God into the worse communicator and purposely tries to misguide people. Rather I see the examples and parables he puts, all it needs is a little fear of God and the book becomes clear. The problem is people play games with the Quran and do not let it contextualize itself. The people will argue with the Mahdi (a) but then the hadiths also show people will then come to the views of Quran after turning the Quran to their views.

God could've been clearer in Quran, but it's clear enough. All it takes is some fear of God and the wonders open up.

I don't believe Bahai Faith is possible with reading Quran and fear of God.

This is the same accusations that the Jews would have made against the Christains and the Christians make against the Muslim.

The fear of God can be a veil as well. Both love and fear an be veils. What balances this is Justice, God is Just.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

This is the same accusations that the Jews would have made against the Christains and the Christians make against the Muslim.

The fear of God can be a veil as well. Both love and fear an be veils. What balances this is Justice, God is Just.

Regards Tony

I've never seen this accusation from a Christian against a Muslim.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why didn't he protect all holy books from all Prophets (a) in all times? That's a good question. However, he didn't protect them, and people were entrusted to do so.

If all holy books all around the world were all protected, it would be easier to all agree now, wouldn't it? So why didn't God do it?

The tests are applicable to Islam. They are not exempt. The Catholics would say that they protected the Scripture and brought down the true interpretation of those books. Exactly as Islam is saying they have brought down the correct interpretation of the Quran, but due to interpretation have to say the Bible is corrupted.

"The Almighty hath tried, and will continue to try, his servants, so that light may be distinguished from darkness, truth from falsehood, right from wrong, guidance from error, happiness from misery, and roses from thorns." Bahá’u’lláh, Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 8-9

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

The tests are applicable to Islam. They are jot exempt. The Catholics would say that they protected the Scripture and brought down the true interpretation of those books. Exactly as Islam is saying they have brought down the correct interpretation of the Quran, but due to interpretation have to say the Bible is corrupted.

"The Almighty hath tried, and will continue to try, his servants, so that light may be distinguished from darkness, truth from falsehood, right from wrong, guidance from error, happiness from misery, and roses from thorns." Bahá’u’lláh, Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 8-9

Regards Tony

That's fine, but Catholics recognize Muslims see their text as corrupted. When I talked to Christians, usually, their objection to Islam is not regarding it's core fundementals, but they have issues with particular laws. Cutting hand of a thief, or fasting long days which they think Quran and Mohammad (s) didn't realize would be the case (that some people have very little time to eat for example).

All my life debating with Christians, I've never seen someone say Islam is not true because it doesn't teach Trinity. I've seen people philosophize that God would not let people get it all wrong about Jesus (a) for example, but never seen, people say Islam is wrong because it teaches a different interpretation or that it says Bible is corrupt.

They are rather saying, out of the two religions, the laws of Christianity make more sense. I've even seen Christians argue against Islam because Christianity is compatible with secularism and Islam is not as it must be a theocracy (even if democratic). They say since secularism is proven more just to minorities and better model for society, Islam must be false due to that.

I've seen different arguments, but never seen the ones you guys state Christians supposedly do.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I've never seen this accusation from a Christian against a Muslim.

Really, I would suggest it is something you do not want to see.

Using your reply with different books.

If anyone considers Islam as even possible and has read the New Testament, they are probably the worse type of humans in terms of deceiving oneself about God and thinking evil of him"

Christianity is a faith of turning one cheek, Islam is like the Old Testament, where defence of one's Faith is lawful. I live in a Christain country, I hear what is said about Islam.

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

If anyone considers Islam as even possible and has read the New Testament, they are probably the worse type of humans in terms of deceiving oneself about God and thinking evil of him"

I've never seen a Christian say this. And I expanded, because God would use double meaning and deceptive speech in this case. Mainly the day of judgement is Baha'allah dispensation, Angels are not real, seal of Nabis means Mohammad (s) is final Nabi that is not him just as he is Adam (a), so on and so forth.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That's fine, but Catholics recognize Muslims see their text as corrupted. When I talked to Christians, usually, their objection to Islam is not regarding it's core fundementals, but they have issues with particular laws. Cutting hand of a thief, or fasting long days which they think Quran and Mohammad (s) didn't realize would be the case (that some people have very little time to eat for example).

All my life debating with Christians, I've never seen someone say Islam is not true because it doesn't teach Trinity. I've seen people philosophize that God would not let people get it all wrong about Jesus (a) for example, but never seen, people say Islam is wrong because it teaches a different interpretation or that it says Bible is corrupt.

They are rather saying, out of the two religions, the laws of Christianity make more sense. I've even seen Christians argue against Islam because Christianity is compatible with secularism and Islam is not as it must be a theocracy (even if democratic). They say since secularism is proven more just to minorities and better model for society, Islam must be false due to that.

I've seen different arguments, but never seen the ones you guys state Christians supposedly do.

This is applicable to all Faiths. Even a Muslim would not object to the core teachings of the Baha'i Faith, as these are shared across all Faiths. Love, Justice, Truthfulness, Trustworthiness, service to each other as one family etc.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I've never seen a Christian say this. And I expanded, because God would use double meaning and deceptive speech in this case. Mainly the day of judgement is Baha'allah dispensation, Angels are not real, seal of Nabis means Mohammad (s) is final Nabi that is not him just as he is Adam (a), so on and so forth.

Then why would you say this against the Baha'i's?

Is this a new level of rejection/hate?

Regards Tony

 

[Link]

Christianity is a faith of turning one cheek, Islam is like the Old Testament, where defence of one's Faith is lawful. I live in a Christain country, I hear what is said about Islam.

This probably a pacifist telling you this. I've heard similar from some Jehovah witnesses. This again, is particular about some of it's code of conduct.

Again, not the argument that you are claiming. The difference is obvious. A Mormon can argue against the Bible, because they believe it's distorted. They believe they have the proper revelation and leaders from God right now. I would not argue against them using the Bible for example, because they don't believe in it to be not distorted. Christians also realize this and so won't argue by the Bible against Quran, because they realize we see Bible as distorted.

However, Baha'allah acknowledged the Quran, and other things like Du'a Nudba, and the hadiths naming twelve Imams (a) including saying the Mahdi is the son Hassan Al-Askari (a) in which he to come with some explanation as to what it means.

The explanation to the verses about day of judgment and things like Du'a Nubda and hadiths naming twelve Imams, don't make sense to me. I can argue by Quran because he testifies to it.

I can argue by du'a Nudba since he acknowledges it. The same is not true of Mormon Faith, you can't argue against them with the Bible since they see it distorted. And same with Islam, you can't argue against with the Bible since we see it distorted.

 

[Link]

Then why would you say this against the Baha'i's?

Is this a new level of rejection/hate?

Regards Tony

I Hate dishonest approach to the Quran. I hate it when Sunnis decontextualize 4:59 from 4:54. I hate it when people play coin with 13:7 and not let the very verse contextualize the final phrase nor look at phrases similar to it with each of it's part having entire themes to it.

I believe Bahais bring a level of dishonesty to Quran that takes a huge peak of it - that others don't compare. The only comparison perhaps was past sects that saw Imams (a) as incarnations of God. They probably went through mental loops to justify distorting Tawhid.

Mormons don't acknowledge Bible, but if they did, there would be a contradiction. They see it distorted. However, you acknowledge Quran. So it's a whole different paradigm.

 

[Trailblazer]

Religion is a living Truth, not a dead truth.

In their springtime religions are the living Truth but all the traditional great religions are in their wintertime.
They are not dead yet but they are in their death throes.
Those religions cannot be renewed back to what they once were, so springtime will never again come for them.

“All that lives, and this includes the religions, have springtime, a time of maturity, of harvest and wintertime. Then religion becomes barren, a lifeless adherence to the letter uninformed by the spirit, and man’s spiritual life declines. When we look at religious history, we see that God has spoken to men precisely at times when they have reached the nadir of their degradation and cultural decadence. Moses came to Israel when it was languishing under the Pharaoh’s yoke, Christ appeared at a time when the Jewish Faith had lost its power and culture of antiquity was in its death those. Muhammad came to a people who lived in barbaric ignorance at the lowest level of culture and into a world in which the former religions had strayed far away from their origins and nearly lost their identity. The Bab addressed Himself to a people who had irretrievably lost their former grandeur and who found themselves in a state of hopeless decadence. Baha’u’llah came to a humanity which was approaching the most critical phase of its history.

‘Abdu’l-Baha writes: ‘God leaves not His children comfortless, but, when the darkness of winter overshadows them, then again He sends His Messengers, the Prophets, with a renewal of the blessed spring. The Sun of Truth appears again on the horizon of the world shining into the eyes of those who sleep, awaking them to behold the glory of a new dawn. Then again will the tree of humanity blossom and bring forth the fruit of righteousness for the healing of the nations.’ Paris Talks, p. 32.’

Some conclusions can be drawn from this fundamental belief. First, all religions are divine in essence and consequently there are no religions which contradict or exclude each other, but only one indivisible divine religion which is renewed periodically and according to the requirements of the age, in cycles of about a thousand years: ‘Our command was but one word.’ Qur’an 54:51. It is therefore hardly surprising if many of Baha’u’llah’s teachings are to be found in former religions either expressly or in an embryonic form. As ‘Abdu’l-Baha says, the Baha’i Faith is ‘not a new path to immortality.’ quoted from: Principles of the Baha’i Faith. On account of this transcendent oneness of all religions, Baha’u’llah exhorted His people to associate with followers of all religions in a spirit of loving-kindness and to make of religion a cause of harmony and peace, not of discord and strife, of hate and division.

The second conclusion is that we cannot perceive what the essence of religion is and what it has the power to achieve if we examine the traditional great religions in their present form. They have achieved much but have reached the end of their road; they were the foundation of great cultures and for thousands of years they were the guiding-star of millions of people in their everyday life and activities. But during the course of history they have also accumulated large amounts of historical ballast. They have moved a long way from their origin and are burdened with their followers’ misdeeds and cravings for power. They are no pleasant sight today, least of all to young people, who no longer see in these religions the ‘salt of the earth’ as Jesus called his disciples, Matthew 5:13 but rather the ‘opium of the people’ (Karl Marx). And one is easily inclined to pass judgment on religion as a whole, and to see in it an anachronism of past times, long since overcome, like the belief in demons in former times. But a withered plant does not give us the faintest idea of its blossoming time. In reality, religions are the ‘light of the world’ and, according to Baha’u’llah’s teachings, the foundation of human culture. It is important to understand that they are as necessary for mankind as sunlight for the plant. Without divine revelation, there would be neither progress nor culture: ‘Were this revelation to be withdrawn, all would perish.’ Taken from (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings, XCIII).

(Udo Schaefer, The Light Shineth in Darkness, pp. 24-26)

 

[Trailblazer]

Without objective evidence otherwise, how did you determine your own question of….. Maybe you were brainwashed, how do you know?

There is objective evidence for the Baha'i Faith. That will not constitute proof for everyone, but we can prove it to ourselves.

Evidence is anything that you see, experience, read, or are told that causes you to believe that something is true or has really happened.
Objective evidence definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

What is subjective and objective evidence?

Subjective evidence is evidence that we cannot evaluate. In fact, we have two choices; to accept what somebody says or reject it. ...
Objective evidence is evidence that we can examine and evaluate for ourselves.
Objective evidence - definition and meaning - Market ...

We can examine and evaluate the evidence for the Baha'i Faith for ourselves so in that sense it is objective evidence. For example, we can examine and evaluate the evidence for Baha'u'llah for ourselves because there are actual facts surrounding the Person, the Life, and the Mission of Baha'u'llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

When I say, "I cannot prove it to others but, it is proved to me", I mean it takes too much to prove it to others. It took me several years to investigate and be proved to me. I cannot spend to share that much information, even if someone is truly and sincerely willing to investigate, let alone most people are not serious in knowing all that.

According to Baha'u'llah, we are not supposed to be trying to 'prove it to others.'

“ ….man can never hope to attain unto the knowledge of the All-Glorious, can never quaff from the stream of divine knowledge and wisdom, can never enter the abode of immortality, nor partake of the cup of divine nearness and favour, unless and until he ceases to regard the words and deeds of mortal men as a standard for the true understanding and recognition of God and His Prophets.”
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 3-4

What I glean from that passage is that we will never discover the truth for ourselves if we go by the words and deeds of other people as a standard by which to understand God and His Prophets. In other words, we should not come to belief in Baha'u'llah according to what other people say, think or do. We have to investigate for ourselves and come to belief that way.

“For the faith of no man can be conditioned by any one except himself.” Gleanings, p. 143