• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Koran v. Bible

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Like i said i don't care about your dating since its accepted by most of the historians, biblical scholars and universities i rather belief them then you on this subject. The dates i gave are right the 60 A.D till 110 A.D is from Mark John has 80/90/150 A.D some even say they are dated back to 250 A.D but since i only follow the Majority i will stick to those. Ok let me ask a simpler question if 5% is not reliable then you agree that there are Corruptions, Interpolations and Influences in the scripture right and how is this reliable? So how can we say that only 5% is corrupted while the Time-Span is so big, some scriptures came 110Years after as you just stated above.
I will address all this stuff in the following. Here are some reasons for the dateing I claim and for the Gospels reliability.
  1. Jesus predicted that the Temple of Jerusalem will be destroyed and the Temple was indeed destroyed in 70 A.D. by the Romans.
    The gospel writers would certainly include this historially important fact but did not - the reason they omitted it may be because the gospels were written before 70 A.D.
  2. Acts was written by Luke after Luke has written the Gospel of Luke.
    At the end of Acts, Luke describes Paul being in Rome under house arrest in 62 A.D. - and ends without telling us the fate of Paul
    Paul was executed by Nero and Nero died in June 68 A.D.... so Paul was executed before that 68 A.D. - if Luke knew about his death, he would certainly wrote about it.
    So Acts was probably written between 62 A.D. and 68 A.D, most likely in 62 A.D. when Paul was under house arrest (Luke was with him and he had time writing). Since Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke before Acts, this gospel would be written before 60 A.D. - which is only about 30 years (a very short time !!!) after Christ's resurrection !
Even earlier documents: Paul's letters !!!
  • Paul's journey in Galatia and the Greek island did not leave behind many churches but - and probably his most important legacy - a large number of letters (that he wrote to the churches that he has established)
Dating Paul's letters:
  • The Gospels were all written after Paul's letters !
  • the Crucifixion occured around 30 A.D.
  • Paul's conversion occured around 32 A.D.
  • Paul's first meeting with the apostles in Jerusalem occured around 35 A.D. ( Acts 9:26)
  • Paul's ministry probably began in the 40's A.D.
  • Paul's letter were probably written in the 50's A.D.
  • Conclusion: Paul's letter were written in a very short 20 years after Christ's resurrection - within the lifetime of many many many eyewitnesses - favorable and unfavorable ones.
An Interesting Point made by Craig Blomberg:
  • Paul's first meeting with the apostles in Jerusalem occured around 35 A.D. (after Paul met Jesus and got blind in Damascus)
  • Paul's letter to the Corinthians mentioned that "he received some teaching that he is passing on" (the teaching are the creeds in 1 Corinthians 15):
    "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. Afterwards He was seen by over five hundred brothers at once, of whom the greater part remain until the present day, but also some fell asleep. Afterwards, He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. And last of all He was seen by me also."
  • So in 35 A.D. - only a 3 or 4 years after Christ's death and resurrection - when Paul spoke with Peter, he was told that "Christ died for our sins", "He was buried", "He rose again the third day" and "He was seen by Cephas....". That is WAY TOO SHORT a time to form any legends !!!
Some other facts in support of the fact that the Gospels do NOT contain legends
  1. The Gospels report the "ugliness" of their leaders
    Suppose, just suppose that the Gospels were legends; suppose that the disciples were inventing a new religion....
    What do you think they would do ?????
    THINK !
    If you are gonna invent a new religion to ATTRACT a lot of people, you want the leaders of the new religion to be as immaculate/perfect as possible... (Who would want to follow a criminal or scumbag as a religious leader ???)
    Take Peter for example - the leader of the disciples. Would Peter - being one of the main man of this newly invented religion - invent a gospel where he denies Jesus not once, not twice, but THREE TIMES ???? Would Peter portraited himself as a COWARD in his own invented religion ???
  2. No man will die for his own lies


    Most of the original Disciples of Jesus were persecuted to death. If they have invented this "gospel" themselves, they would know it is a lie. Human nature is such that:
    • Some man will die for the truth
    • Some man may even die for a lie invented by someone else
    • But NO man will die for a lie invented by himself
    Who wrote the Gospels and When are the Gospels written
Here is another site with some good informal information. The Bible: Who actually wrote the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and can we trust them? « Beyond Faith Ministry
Here is a site that deals with just Luke and Acts alone and is very detailed.
The Writing of the New Testament - Luke and Acts

I reject your position that I should restrict myself to only my ideas or to non-Christian sources. That is an illogical and ineffective method of research. What Muslim experts say about their scripture is very important to me and I would never suggest they could not be used to you. I have one more post to include and then will wait for you to digest all this stuff. Take your time but please do not just ignore stuff because you don't like it.
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Like i said i don't care about your dating since its accepted by most of the historians, biblical scholars and universities i rather belief them then you on this subject. The dates i gave are right the 60 A.D till 110 A.D is from Mark John has 80/90/150 A.D some even say they are dated back to 250 A.D but since i only follow the Majority i will stick to those.


Ok let me ask a simpler question if 5% is not reliable then you agree that there are Corruptions, Interpolations and Influences in the scripture right and how is this reliable?

So how can we say that only 5% is corrupted while the Time-Span is so big, some scriptures came 110Years after as you just stated above.
Sorry this is so long but I am making one last attempt to prove my claim in a way that can't be ignored. Just so you know I didn't make up the 5% and the direct translation from Greek thing here is this:
Has the Bible changed and become corrupted over time?

Some people have the idea that the New Testament has been translated "so many times" that it has become corrupted through stages of translating. If the translations were being made from other translations, they would have a case. But translations are actually made directly from original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic source texts based on thousands of ancient manuscripts.
For instance, we know the New Testament we have today is true to its original form because:
1. We have such a huge number of manuscript copies -- over 24,000.
2. Those copies agree with each other, word for word, 99.5% of the time.
3. The dates of these manuscripts are very close to the dates of their originals
Who Wrote the Bible - Is the Bible Reliable?
Here is an example of an Bart Ehrmanism.
In Matthew: "This is Jesus, the king of the Jews."
In Mark: "The king of the Jews."
In John: "Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews."
Who Wrote the Bible - Is the Bible Reliable?
He would not only count that as two variants even though the say the exact same thing he would have counted a variant for every manuscript that contains them. He might claims dozens or more variants for these meaningless differences.

So why, considering this is about 1/1000th of the information that can be used to establish the bibles extra ordinary accuracy, do people still insist it is unreliable. Mostly because of a preconcieved worldview or desire for it not to be true. You are a Muslim and so have a certain worldview that will not allow you to consider the bible trust worthy. I will post something that is very well written on this subject.
It is often asserted by Muslim writers that we don’t know who wrote the Gospels and that the orthodox traditional authorship position is untenable. It is common for Muslim writers to quote snippets from critical and even careful conservative scholars regarding Gospel authorship. For example a scholar may be quoted as affirming that in light of their view of the evidence it is “probable” or “possible” that traditional authorship is correct – while ignoring the positive arguments the scholar does provide in favour of traditional authorship and the numerous scholars who view the evidence to be strong. Or for example a scholar may be quoted as stating that “Matthew does not identify himself as Matthew within the body of text” as though that demonstrates Matthaean authorship to be erroneous. But then the actual positive arguments for Matthaean authorship given by the same scholar (internal or external) will be omitted in the Muslim paper or not handled properly. This method assumes that traditional authorship can’t be demonstrated apart from a statement saying “I Matthew wrote this Gospel”. I will therefore build a case for traditional Gospel authorship using evidence and arguments which are just as powerful – data presented by qualified scholars that I feel the Muslim writers have not yet dealt with properly for the most part in the materials I have surveyed. Oftentimes it seems as though Muslim apologists feel that if they can quote statements from liberal critics or take a few snippets from careful conservative scholars which they feel are supportive of their position in some sense then that is enough to completely settle the issue of authorship. However, I am going to challenge this by exhorting Muslim apologists to actually deal with the bulk of positive evidence put forth by the numerous qualified scholars who argue for traditional Gospel authorship – the many who would say the evidence is strong. It is extremely important to actually present the positive data itself and interact with it in order for the best of both sides to be represented. I was initially setting out to refute the Muslim counter case against the bulk of positive evidence cited in favour of traditional Gospel authorship but I have not yet seen an in depth Muslim critique of this sort. So, for this article I will provide a fresh case for the traditional authorship of the synoptic gospels, John, and Acts, since Acts is so closely connected with Luke in this discussion. It is my hope that this article will lead to meaningful discussion with a focus on the actual evidence.
Who Wrote the Gospels? Internal and External Arguments for Traditional Authorship

The above points remind me of one of Deedat's silliest points. He would say "Did Christ ever say the words I am God worship me?". How meaningless, Muhammad never said "I am a homo sapien male" Does that mean that he was not a human man? Who is Deedat to set the ctiteria for Christ especiallly criteria so invalid? That's useless non-scholarship but proves the points in the above statements. This article goes on to give a very good explanation why the Gospels were written by the apostles. If you sent me an article from answering Chrstianity I would not dismiss it because I didn't like it. I would either show why it is wrong or take it for consideration.

ONCE AGAIN I APOLAGIZE FOR THE LEGNTH OF ALL THIS BUT YOU HAVE BEEN POSTING FAR MORE TOPICS THAN I CAN ADDRESS IN DEPTH SO I DECIDED TO COVER AT LEAST ONE IN A LITTLE DETAIL. DON'T WORRY ABOUT ADDRESSING EVERY POINT JUST THINK ON THESE THINGS WITH AN UNBIASED MIND AND LET ME KNOW WHAT YOU CONCLUDE.
Peace,
 
Last edited:

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
On the contrary, I've endeavored to answer the questions you asked me. And even if I'm incompetant at that, this still isn't a reason for you to avoid investigating the Faith yourself.
It's not my role to prove anything to you--let alone to make up your mind for you! That's YOUR task--nobody else's!

Then how did you know how they spell it?

Because of the obvious fact that I'm well aware of Monty Python even though I'm unfamiliar with the sketch in question.

Why do I even have to explain this??? This isn't rockeet science, after all.

(And I note, BTW, that various people remain unable to spell "ridiculous" correctly even after the right spelling has been stressed.) :-S

Bruce
 
Last edited:

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Because of the obvious fact that I'm well aware of Monty Python even though I'm unfamiliar with the sketch in question.

Why do I even have to explain this??? This isn't rockeet science, after all.

(And I note, BTW, that various people remain unable to spell "ridiculous" correctly even after the right spelling has been stressed.) :-S

Bruce
Bruce if you knew how little I cared when I make a spelling mistake it would convince you it isn't worth the effort to notify me.
If you are referring to the sketch I was just kidding and you don't have to explain anything. If you are referring to your faith then me requesting you post something that proves it is likely from God or do not expect me to comb through thousands of pages of some come lately new age philosophy is reasonable. I could do so with Christianity very quickly. Bruce, I just don't have time and I have found my God and so am not looking for him any where else. I was just curious.
 

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
Bruce if you knew how little I cared when I make a spelling mistake it would convince you it isn't worth the effort to notify me.

Pardon me for having standards.

If you are referring to the sketch I was just kidding and you don't have to explain anything.

Then a smiley would have worked wonders: you have to remember that the rest of us aren't mind readers.

If you are referring to your faith then me requesting you post something that proves it is likely from God or do not expect me to comb through thousands of pages of some come lately new age philosophy is reasonable [sic].

We aren't "come lately," having been around for over 169 years already. So we're hardly "new age"--the more so given that we have very specific teachings and 200 volumes of scripture.

And you needn't "comb through" anything if you choose not to, though of course in that case it's your loss, so sorry to say! There are indeed good summaries available for those who are interested, so "thousands of pages" aren't necessary.

Peace,

Bruce
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Pardon me for having standards.
Well it is a grave offence but I will let it go this once.



Then a smiley would have worked wonders: you have to remember that the rest of us aren't mind readers.
Regardless even if you didn't know I was kidding it surely wasn't an offensive statement. I hate emoticons or anything else in pop culture. I'm old school.


We aren't "come lately," having been around for over 169 years already. So we're hardly "new age"--the more so given that we have very specific teachings and 200 volumes of scripture.
The amount of scripture is not an argument for it's truth. Age is a relative term. It must be compared to something to make it relevant. When compared to Christianity and it's roots in Judaism then Baha' i is about 32 times younger. If there is anything that is needed in Baha' i that is not in another religion then why didn't we get it until now. If not why do we have it at all. If the world ended today 99% of the people who have existed lived and died without this religion so why is it relevant now?




And you needn't "comb through" anything if you choose not to, though of course in that case it's your loss, so sorry to say! There are indeed good summaries available for those who are interested, so "thousands of pages" aren't necessary.
I have a limited amount of time. I only have enough to spend it on important and meaningful research. If I researched evey new faith or even old one that existed I would have to live to a thousand to understand them all. As it is, all my time is spent of the three Abrahamic religions and the main oriental philisophical "religions". In order to justify research into one that has 1/32 the history and .035 as many members as mine I would like someone who knows the faith to give me some claims that show that it has a devine source. If you asked me to do that for the bible, I could give you dozens in 10 minutes.
 

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
[W]hy is it relevant now?

Because it contains teachings specifically for this Age and its circumstances, not for some other millenia ago!

(And BTW, you need to review the distinction between "its" and "it's" so that you can use them correctly.)

Peace, :)

Bruce
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Because it contains teachings specifically for this Age and its circumstances, not for some other millenia ago!

(And BTW, you need to review the distinction between "its" and "it's" so that you can use them correctly.)

Peace, :)

Bruce
Ok, knowing that I claim to be born again and going to heaven. I have all the law and future revelation I need. What is it in Baha' I about this age that would justify its adoption? Whatever that is why should I believe it is from a devine source?


If you think its and it's is bad just hang around and I will butcher a post so bad you will not believe it. What are you some kind of grammer police? You want to know why I hate grammer so much. It is based on nothing. Science and mathematics is based on natural law. Religion is based on revelation. Philosophy is based on natural logic. Grammer is based on a subjective arbitrary opinion, that changes for no reason from time to time. That and this is not a graduate thesis. I have a very short time and can't proofread everything.
 

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
As to grammar, if you simply learn the basic rules, you'll be able to write and communicate well with little if any need to proofread! And there's no virtue in drawing negative attention to yourself by making grammatical errors, please note.

What is it in Baha' I about this age that would justify its adoption?

Among other things such as an entirely non-political administrative system, it includes a number of important contemporary teachings, including (to name just a few):

  • Explicit abolition of slavery, unlike both Christianity and Islam as originally revealed.
  • Stress on the equality of men and women.
  • Condemnation of aggression and waging war.
  • A clear statement about the harmony of science and religion and the importance of both.
  • Emphasis on unity and clear condemnation of racism and divisiveness.

Whatever that is why should I believe it is from a devine source?

Divne source. Andy Devine has been dead for decades. :)

As ever, the primary--and best--test is that stated by Christ: "By their fruits ye shall know them!"

Thus, as well as fitting other proof verses, to the extent that a religion fits the "fruits" listed in Galatians, you're well on the way to discovering a legitimate religion!

Peace, :)

Bruce
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
As to grammar, if you simply learn the basic rules, you'll be able to write and communicate well with little if any need to proofread! And there's no virtue in drawing negative attention to yourself by making grammatical errors, please note.



Among other things such as an entirely non-political administrative system, it includes a number of important contemporary teachings, including (to name just a few):

  • Explicit abolition of slavery, unlike both Christianity and Islam as originally revealed.
  • Stress on the equality of men and women.
  • Condemnation of aggression and waging war.
  • A clear statement about the harmony of science and religion and the importance of both.
  • Emphasis on unity and clear condemnation of racism and divisiveness.

Divne source. Andy Devine has been dead for decades. :)

As ever, the primary--and best--test is that stated by Christ: "By their fruits ye shall know them!"

Thus, as well as fitting other proof verses, to the extent that a religion fits the "fruits" listed in Galatians, you're well on the way to discovering a legitimate religion!

Peace, :)

Bruce

Then how you agree that islam and christianity are in line with your belief,whereas
your religion have different views regarding slavery,even though that you have a wrong
idea about slavery in Islam,as Islam always asking to free slaves and that all of us are
equal,even rich and poor,but the real winner,who regard himself as a slave to god.
Your books always saying that the bible is right,then you are saying slavery in the bible
is not as in Bahai,so how you agree that your god is the same of the bible.symbols again.

[youtube]_ubpDRRkDis[/youtube]
Slavery Islam - YouTube
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
As to grammar, if you simply learn the basic rules, you'll be able to write and communicate well with little if any need to proofread! And there's no virtue in drawing negative attention to yourself by making grammatical errors, please note.
You starting to worry me.



Among other things such as an entirely non-political administrative system, it includes a number of important contemporary teachings, including (to name just a few):



  • [*]Explicit abolition of slavery, unlike both Christianity and Islam as originally revealed.
    [*]
    I do not know about Islam. However Christians were a driving force in ending slavery all over the world. The bible never promotes slavery. It does address the fact that it existed in the old testament and commented on some issues concerning it but it never validated it. As far as Christianity is concerned there is no promotion of slavery and Christians have fought it everywhere.
    [*]
    [*]Stress on the equality of men and women.
    [*]
    The equality of all people is a core teaching of Christianity.
    "For there is no partiality with God" (Romans 2:11). Does the Bible support the idea that all men are created equal?
  • Condemnation of aggression and waging war.
    There is no more passive teachings on violence than Christ's.
  • [*]A clear statement about the harmony of science and religion and the importance of both.
    That is either a fact or a falseity and is demonstrated by reality and is not affected by it's claim on way or the other. The bible actually demostrates this reality by claiming completely accurate scientific knowledge at a time when it was not known by man, thereby demonstrating a truth far above a bare assertion.
    [*]
    [*]Emphasis on unity and clear condemnation of racism and divisiveness.
    [*]
    As can be seen there is nothing new here. However the bible is a little more restrictive on inclusiveness. Especially in the old testament God says for believers not to have strong attachments to unbelievers. Bad company corrupts good morals. And you, masters, do the same things to them, giving up threatening, knowing that your own Master also is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him" (Ephesians 6:5-9). It really doesn't matter who you are because "God shows personal favoritism to no man" (Galatians 2:6). Does the Bible support the idea that all men are created equal?
I do not see anything new here and I certainly do not see any reason to conclude a source for these things beyond man.



Divne source. Andy Devine has been dead for decades. :)
Ok you are not allowed to comment on spelling as long as you keep doing this.

As ever, the primary--and best--test is that stated by Christ: "By their fruits ye shall know them!"
That is a good test for seperating true Christians from people who claim to be but are not born again and have only a superficial faith. That is what that test was for. It is not to declare anything as from God because it contains unremarkable but true statements.

Thus, as well as fitting other proof verses, to the extent that a religion fits the "fruits" listed in Galatians, you're well on the way to discovering a legitimate religion!
I have no idea what you are saying here.

Keep it coming though.
 
Last edited:

arthra

Baha'i
Then how you agree that islam and christianity are in line with your belief,whereas
your religion have different views regarding slavery,even though that you have a wrong
idea about slavery in Islam,as Islam always asking to free slaves and that all of us are
equal,even rich and poor,but the real winner,who regard himself as a slave to god.
Your books always saying that the bible is right,then you are saying slavery in the bible
is not as in Bahai,so how you agree that your god is the same of the bible.symbols again.

I think it can be said that the roots of the teachings about abolishing slavery were probably in Islam and Christianity but they were imlicit rather than explicit... HAd Islam abolished slavery that would have been great but slave trade was still going into the nineteenth century... Same with Christianity.. It took John Woolman and the abolitionists movement to win over the slave holding Christians who thought the Bible supported it..

Same with warfare.. I would agree that ISlam brought rules of warfare and rules for prisoners of war but allowed warfare..Christianity allowed the Justy War theory and directed crusades against heretics and Muslims... Christians fought a devastating First World War..so the teaching against war was implicit maybe and held be some Quakers and Brethren but it was not explicit enough to make much of a dent..

Comes the Baha'i teachings...slavery abolished.. a world parliament and international court of arbitration are supposed to eliminate war...we've got the beginnings but still have a way to go.

Reducing the extremes of wealth and poverty are implicit perhaps in Christianity and to a degree in Islam but a more explicit teaching is needed to actually reduce the extremes...

There's more...the equality of men and women.. maybe implicit in previous teachings but not explicit enough or what's needed today

Universal education...
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Then how you agree that islam and christianity are in line with your belief,whereas
your religion have different views regarding slavery,even though that you have a wrong
idea about slavery in Islam,as Islam always asking to free slaves and that all of us are
equal,even rich and poor,but the real winner,who regard himself as a slave to god.
Your books always saying that the bible is right,then you are saying slavery in the bible
is not as in Bahai,so how you agree that your god is the same of the bible.symbols again.
Haha, symbols again. No, not this time.

The Religious Laws are clear with no hidden or symbolic meaning. (Muhkamat)
Whenever a Messenger comes, God establishes religious Laws according to the Age that people are living. So, God can abrogate, modify or keep the Laws every time He sends a Messenger in a new Age. This does not mean the religions which have different Laws, are not from the same God. God adapts new Laws to what people practice, but He can always bring better Laws from Age to Age, as humanity develops a better social system.
Grade 1 student is given a Book according to his level, grade 2 student is given a Book according to his own level in a progressive revelation, but the teacher is the same.

That is the meaning of the verse:
"To each age its Book. What He pleaseth will God abrogate or confirm: for with Him is the source of revelation." (Quran 12:38-9)

There is also a Hadith about this:

Imam Jaffer al-Sadiq (AS) has said, "The Prophet of Allah never talked to people on the basis of his own supreme intellect and he used to say, `We the group of Prophets have been ordered to speak to the people at the level of their intelligence.'"
 
Last edited:

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Haha, symbols again. No, not this time.

The Religious Laws are clear with no hidden or symbolic meaning. (Muhkamat)
Whenever a Messenger comes, God establishes religious Laws according to the Age that people are living. So, God can abrogate, modify or keep the Laws every time He sends a Messenger in a new Age. This does not mean the religions which have different Laws, are not from the same God. God adapts new Laws to what people practice, but He can always bring better Laws from Age to Age, as humanity develops a better social system.
Grade 1 student is given a Book according to his level, grade 2 student is given a Book according to his own level in a progressive revelation, but the teacher is the same.

That is the meaning of the verse:
"To each age its Book. What He pleaseth will God abrogate or confirm: for with Him is the source of revelation." (Quran 12:38-9)

There is also a Hadith about this:

Imam Jaffer al-Sadiq (AS) has said, "The Prophet of Allah never talked to people on the basis of his own supreme intellect and he used to say, `We the group of Prophets have been ordered to speak to the people at the level of their intelligence.'"

As i said before it is a philosophy,because slavery can never be ended by what you called better social system or modernised world
as investigation show that slavery of today is even horrible.

So do you mean that god sent bahaullah to stop wars and end slavery but he failed to do so.

Also no one in our region believed on bahaullah who supposed to be a middle eastern man and not from Nauru or tonga

Muslims in the middle east

Reference : List of religious populations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  1. Saudi Arabia 100% (90% Sunni, 10% Shi'a) (foreign workers are excluded)
  2. Somalia 100% (mostly Sunni)
  3. Afghanistan 99.9% (85% Sunni, 14% Shi'a)
  4. Yemen 99.9% (65-70% Sunni, 30-35% Shi'a)
  5. Mauritania 99.9% (mostly Sunni)
  6. Maldives 99.33% (mostly Sunni)
  7. Oman 99% (mostly Ibadhi)[33] (foreign workers are excluded)
  8. Djibouti +99% (mostly Sunni)[34]
  9. Tunisia 99% (mostly Sunni)
  10. Algeria 99% (mostly Sunni)
  11. Turkey 98.25% (83% Sunni, 15% Shia)
  12. Bahrain 98% (50%Sunni and 50%shi'a)[35] (foreign workers are excluded)
  13. Comoros 98% (mostly Sunni)[36]
  14. Morocco 98.4% (mostly Sunni)
  15. Niger +95% (95% Sunni and Sufi)[37]
  16. Iran 98% (mostly Shi'a)
  17. Pakistan 92.8%[38] (75-80% Sunni, 20-25% Shi'a)[39]
  18. Iraq 97.8% (55% Shi'a, 45% Sunni)
  19. Libya 99% (Sunni)
  20. Egypt 94% (Sunni)
  21. Qatar 90.5%
  22. Kuwait 96%
  23. United Arab Emirates 90%
  24. Azerbaijan 93.6%[40] (mostly Shia)
  25. Syria 80% (85% Sunni, 15% Shi'a)
  26. Bangladesh 89.5%[41] (mostly Sunni)
So no seats for bahai in the region where bahaulla was born,but that religion was
born in different countries abroad by 1-2% ,thats really funny

Bahá'ís
Countries with the greatest proportion of Bahá'ís (as of 2000[update]):
  1. Nauru 9.22%
  2. Tonga 6.09%
  3. Tuvalu 5.86%
  4. Kiribati 4.70%
  5. Tokelau 4.33%
  6. Cocos (Keeling) Islands 3.72%
  7. Bolivia 3.25%
  8. Falkland Islands 2.98%
  9. Vanuatu 2.78%
  10. Belize 2.73%
  11. Samoa 2.37%
  12. Guyana 2.09%
  13. United Arab Emirates 1.95%
  14. São Tomé and Príncipe 1.88%
  15. Mauritius 1.84%
  16. Zambia 1.70%
  17. Dominica 1.61%
  18. Federated States of Micronesia 1.61%
  19. Niue 1.53%
  20. Marshall Islands 1.50%
 
Last edited by a moderator:

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
As i said before it is a philosophy,because slavery can never be ended by what you called better social system or modernised world
as investigation show that slavery of today is even horrible.

Slavery in a literal sense is almost abrogated in the world. What you are referring is the extreme of wealth and poverty in the World, which also Baha'u'llah has many teachings how to eliminate that. But we believe God's teachings effects the world gradually
See how today, the president of USA is a black man, while 200-300 years ago, black men were slaves in America. Is this not a big change?



So do you mean that god sent bahaullah to stop wars and end slavery but he failed to do so.

These changes would happen gradually. Because God sent the teachings, now people gradually learn, and the World peace and unity shall arrive.
That's because, God created men, with free will, so, they have the option to accept the revelation and guidance of God. God doesn't force people to believe. But we believe gradually and eventually Baha'u'llah's revelation will give a new spirit and resurrect all from the death of ignorance to the life of guidance.


So no seats for bahai in the region where bahaulla was born,but that religion was
born in different countries abroad by 1-2% ,thats really funny

Do you believe that Jesus was a prophet who said these words:

"For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country." John 4:44

Do you believe that Quran is from God, and these are His words:

“Each nation hath plotted darkly against their Messenger to lay violent hold on Him, and disputed with vain words to invalidate the truth.” Qur’án 40:5.


If the prophets are from God, why God didn't prevent them from killing them? why God does not help their prophets to win against their enemies?


Say: "Verily, there came to you Messengers before me, with clear signs and even with what you speak of; why then did you kill them, if you are truthful?" Quran 3:183

“As oft as an Apostle cometh unto you with that which your souls desire not, ye swell with pride, accusing some of being impostors and slaying others.” Qur’án 2:87.

“O the misery of men! No Messenger cometh unto them but they laugh Him to scorn.” Qur’án 36:30.


"We shall record what they have said and their killing of the Prophets unjustly" Quran 3:181

and here is another question:

Quran says: “And verily Our host shall conquer.” Qur’án 37:173.

Then why still Moslems didn't conquer the world?
Why the Armies of Moslems were defeated?

Battle of Tours - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

arthra

Baha'i
I think

(1) if there was greater freedom of religion in some countries rather than suppression of minorities you'd see some different figures...also,

(2) simply because there are large numbers of people in a given religion doesn't mean they are practicing their religion as they should.

and (3) If you asked people if the world was flat a vast majority 90 % would probably say "yes" before 1492...and even after wards. If you asked if the sun revolved around the earth up until the sixteenth century most people would say "yes".

So mere numbers in and of itself are not convincing...
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
Slavery in a literal sense is almost abrogated in the world. What you are referring is the extreme of wealth and poverty in the World, which also Baha'u'llah has many teachings how to eliminate that. But we believe God's teachings effects the world gradually
See how today, the president of USA is a black man, while 200-300 years ago, black men were slaves in America. Is this not a big change

These changes would happen gradually. Because God sent the teachings, now people gradually learn, and the World peace and unity shall arrive.
That's because, God created men, with free will, so, they have the option to accept the revelation and guidance of God. God doesn't force people to believe. But we believe gradually and eventually Baha'u'llah's revelation will give a new spirit and resurrect all from the death of ignorance to the life of guidance.

Aha, So the US president is black today, because of the effect of Bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually

Aha,Trajedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in the year 1945 was because of the effect of bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually.

Aha,the war between Iraq & Iran in the year 1980-1988 was because of bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually.

Aha,the US war in iraq was because of bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually.

Aha,...................................the world is changing gradually.


Do you believe that Jesus was a prophet who said these words:

"For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country." John 4:44

Do you believe that Quran is from God, and these are His words:

“Each nation hath plotted darkly against their Messenger to lay violent hold on Him, and disputed with vain words to invalidate the truth.” Qur’án 40:5.


If the prophets are from God, why God didn't prevent them from killing them? why God does not help their prophets to win against their enemies?


Say: "Verily, there came to you Messengers before me, with clear signs and even with what you speak of; why then did you kill them, if you are truthful?" Quran 3:183

“As oft as an Apostle cometh unto you with that which your souls desire not, ye swell with pride, accusing some of being impostors and slaying others.” Qur’án 2:87.

“O the misery of men! No Messenger cometh unto them but they laugh Him to scorn.” Qur’án 36:30.


"We shall record what they have said and their killing of the Prophets unjustly" Quran 3:181

i am not in a position to clarify what have been said in the bible and not a scholar to explain what is the stories behind the prophets mentioned in the quran,but what i know and understand is the facts and figures of today and which is clear and obvious.

Prophet Mohammed was born in Saudi Arabia and 100% of it's population are muslims and even the middle east became about 98% as muslims,whereas bahaullah born in Iran with 0% followers except with a few supported before by britain and then by USA but they failed and
have no effect in Iran.

in the holy land (palestine) in 1881 Muslims made up about 86.6% of the population, Christians were about 9.1% of the population, and 2.8-4.3% of the population were indigenous, non-Zionist Jews

So where is bahaullah,facts and figures show me that this religion was made up and cooked for political purposes and just to show islam and christianity as false religions similar to bahai faith and that the only right one is judaism whom are waiting for their messiah and that Jesus pbuh,mohammed pbuh were false prophets and they tried to make one fake prophet to show us that jesus pbuh and Mohammed pbuh were similar to bahaullah,but no,they failed,because facts & figures are talking,Muslims & christians are consisting the large portion of the world and shortly after Jesus pbuh will be back all believers will be joined together as one unity.

and here is another question
Quran says: “And verily Our host shall conquer.” Qur’án 37:173.

Then why still Moslems didn't conquer the world?
Why the Armies of Moslems were defeated?

Battle of Tours - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nice,so you are now against the quran and explain the verses the way you wish.

[youtube]f69x9tN-fvs[/youtube]
Islam conquers the world.flv - YouTube
 
Last edited by a moderator:

arthra

Baha'i
Trruth,

Using large letters doesn't really enhance your point of view... Try normal sized script it's easier to read..

The tragedy of Nagasaki and Hiroshima could have been avoided in my view had the nations of the earth elected a World Parliament and set up an International Court of Arbitration .... Baha'u'llah addressed the rulers of HIs day around 1868-1871 counseling them to set up a world parliament...for the most part they failed to do this. After the devestating WWI they did set up a League of Nations however it basically collapsed with the rise of the axis powers..again, after WWII they set up the United Nations..hopefully, this will lead someday to a true World Parliament as envisioned by Baha'u'llah.

Baha'i Faith was not "made up and cooked for political purposes". Baha'is have always been non-partisan and uninvolved in partisan politics.. If you want to look for a religion involved in politics you should not have to look very far.

Once again mere numbers in my view do not establish the proof of a religion... The followers of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad were at times very few while most of the world disbelieved in Them. So arguing that simply numbers should establish truth is not a strong argument.

Baha'is are not "against" the Qur'an.
 
Last edited:

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Aha, So the US president is black today, because of the effect of Bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually

When Abdulbaha travelled to USA to teach, He for the first time went to churches and told them, there is no difference between white and black.
It's upto you to investigate.



Aha,Trajedy of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in the year 1945 was because of the effect of bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually.
Aha,the war between Iraq & Iran in the year 1980-1988 was because of bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually.

Aha,the US war in iraq was because of bahaullah teachings,the world is changing gradually.

The wars are because the people were selfish and they didn't want listen to the Messenger of God. Had they listend, the world would have been a better place.



i am not in a position to clarify what have been said in the bible and not a scholar to explain what is the stories behind the prophets mentioned in the quran,but what i know and understand is the facts and figures of today and which is clear and obvious.

On this one I cannot agree with you. I think Quran is a Book that talks about previous prophets and people to teach a lesson. So, if you just ignore Quran and Bible lessons, you would be missing a lot of things that would teach you about how people always treated their prophets and how always they failed to recognize the Messengers. So please do not try to find a way to scape from the verses of Quran.

Aslo I don't agree that you are not a scholar to explain... My question is, did Allah say in Holy Quran, that we need to go to the scholars to exlain the Quran for us? Or He said he sent the Book to mankind to think about it's verses?

Please refer to Quran if you like to answer.


Prophet Mohammed was born in Saudi Arabia and 100% of it's population are muslims and even the middle east became about 98% as muslims,

If you read the History, christianity took 300 years to spread in the World, and in those years, the number of christians were very little. But now, they are more than Moslems.
The Baha'i Faith was spread in the World in only 100 years.

If there are many Moslems now, but this did not happen imediately. It took many years, and also with wars and wars. This is a historical fact.
Also, as Prophet Muhammad said, there will be a time that the Mosques are full of people who only by name they are Moslem, but they are the farthest from true Islam. (So, maybe that's true?? what do u think?)



whereas bahaullah born in Iran with 0% followers except with a few supported before by britain and then by USA but they failed and
have no effect in Iran.

0% baha'is in Iran??? This is not true. The biggest minority in Iran are Baha'is. So, you say 0%, is not true. Again you are ignoring the teachings of Quran, that every nation rose against their Messenger.


Nice,so you are now against the quran and explain the verses the way you wish.
I didn't explain them. Go read my previous post again. I only quoted the verses of Quran, and asked some questions.


But it seems that you did not like those verses of Holy Quran. Why?
:)
 
Last edited:

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
If you read the history, when Abdulbaha travelled to USA to teach, He for the first time went to churches and told them, there is no difference between white and black.
It's upto you to investigate.

i didn't know his history and sorry i ain't interested to know.

The wars are because the people were selfish and they didn't want listen to the Messenger of God. Had they listend, the world would have been a better place.


But they listen to bahaullah only for the black to be a president for the USA.:shrug:


On this one I cannot agree with you. I think Quran is a Book that talks about previous prophets and people to teach a lesson. So, if you just ignore Quran and Bible lessons, you would be missing a lot of things that would teach you about how people always treated their prophets and how always they failed to recognize the Messengers. So please do not try to find a way to scape from the verses of Quran.

Aslo I don't agree with you saying you are not a scholar to explain... My question is, did Allah said in Holy Quran, that you need go to the scholars to exlain the Quran for you? Or He sent the Book to mankind to think about it's verses?

Please refer to Quran if you like to answer.

of course i refer to quran and that is the reason i am muslim.


Say: We believe in God, and that which has been sent down on us, and sent down on Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the Tribes, and in that which was given to Moses and Jesus, and the Prophets, of their Lord; we make no division between any of them, and to Him we surrender. 3:84

He who chooses a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him, and in the Everlasting Life he will be among the losers. 3:85

The true religion with God is Islam. Those who were given the Book were not at variance except after the knowledge came to them, being insolent one to another. And whoso disbelieves in Gods signs. God is swift at the reckoning. 3:19

Whomsoever God desires to guide, He expands his breast to Islam; whomsoever He desires to lead astray, He makes his breast narrow, tight, as if he were climbing to heaven. So God lays abomination upon those who believe not. 6:125

It could be that those who disbelieve will wish that they were Muslims. 15:2

Forbidden to you are carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, what has been hallowed to other than God, the beast strangled; the beast beaten down, the beast fallen to death, the beast gored, and that devoured by beasts of prey - excepting that you have sacrificed duly -- as also things sacrificed to idols, and partition by the divining arrows; that is ungodliness. Today the unbelievers have despaired of your religion; therefore fear them not, but fear you Me. Today I have perfected your religion for you, and I have completed My blessing upon you, and I have approved Islam for your religion. But whosoever is constrained in emptiness and not inclining purposely to sin -- God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. 5:3

And who speaks fairer than he who calls unto God and does righteousness and says, Surely I am of them that surrender. 41:33

O Ye who believe! fear Allah with fear due to Him, and die not except ye be Muslims. 3:102

What, do they desire another religion than Gods, and to Him has surrendered whoso is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly, and to Him they shall be returned? 3:83

No; Abraham in truth was not a Jew, neither a Christian; but he was a Muslim and one pure of faith; certainly he was never of the idolaters. 3:67

And Abraham charged his sons with this and Jacob likewise: My sons, God has chosen for you the religion; see that you die not save in surrender. 2:132

Why, were you witnesses, when death came to Jacob? When he said to his sons, What will you serve after me? They said, We will serve thy God and the God of thy fathers Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac, One God; to Him we surrender. 2:133

And We brought the Children of Israel over the sea; and Pharaoh and his hosts followed them insolently and impetuously till, when the drowning overtook him, he said, I believe that there is no god but He in whom the Children of Israel believe; I am of those that surrender. 10:90

We have charged man, that he be kind to his parents; his mother bore him painfully, and painfully she gave birth to him; his bearing and his weaning are thirty months. Until, when he is fully grown, and reaches forty years, he says, O my Lord, dispose me that I may be thankful for Thy blessing wherewith Thou hast blessed me and my father and mother, and that I may do righteousness well-pleasing to Thee; and make me righteous also in my seed. Behold, I repent to Thee, and am among those that surrender. 46:15

If you read the History, christianity took 300 years to spread in the World, and in those years, the number of christians were very little. But now, they are more than Moslems.
The Baha'i Faith was spread in the World in only 100 years.

If there are many Moslems now, but this did not happen imediately. It took many years, and also with wars and wars. This is a historical fact.
Also, as Prophet Muhammad said, there will be a time that the Mosks are full of people who only by name they are Moslem, but they are the farthest from true Islam. (So, maybe that's true?? what do u think?)

Your logic is funny,so when do you think bahai will reach 2 billions


0% baha'is in Iran??? This is not true. The biggest minority in Iran are Baha'is. So, you say 0%, is not true. Again you are ignoring the teachings of Quran, that every nation rose against their Messenger.

How you can actually know who is bahai in Iran while they are jailed and executed,did you count them.:shrug:


Quran says: “And verily Our host shall conquer.” Qur’án 37:173.
Then why still Moslems didn't conquer the world?
Why the Armies of Moslems were defeated?

Battle of Tours - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I didn't explain them. Go read my previous post again. I only quoted the verses of Quran, and asked some questions.


But it seems that you did not like those verses of Holy Quran. Why?
:)

No you are wrong ,but when you presented the verse,you were mocking about the verse that say “And verily Our host shall conquer.”Qur’án 37:173

and your explanation was against the verse by saying :
Then why still Moslems didn't conquer the world?
Why the Armies of Moslems were defeated?

i am really surprised that you don't know even what you had wrote.
 
Top