Explain to me why god is real using facts

[Trailblazer]

It's odd because you say you don't know much about the Bible. Does that include the NT, or do you know a lot about it? You must, since you know enough to think that Paul took Christianity in a wrong direction.

I just know a few scattered verses from the Bible. I know that Paul took Christianity off track because Baha’i scholars have written about that.

But what are the things you like about the NT if you don't like the storytelling? The gospels are the story of Jesus. What you quoted is what some writer tells us about what Jesus allegedly said. How does he know? Was he there? Did he take notes? Did he get it from hearsay? Did he paraphrase? Christians take it as the literal truth about what Jesus said and did. Baha'is don't and you've shown that you believe even less than most other Baha'is. That is why it is odd. If you don't believe it is the literal truth... If you don't believe it is 100% authentic, then why use it?

I do not use the NT for anything, except sometimes to show how Baha’u’llah fulfilled the promises of Jesus or to point out how Jesus conveyed the same spiritual truths as Baha’u’llah... For example, look at how similar these are:

Matthew 6:19-21 Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal;but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.

“For every one of you his paramount duty is to choose for himself that on which no other may infringe and none usurp from him. Such a thing—and to this the Almighty is My witness—is the love of God, could ye but perceive it.

Build ye for yourselves such houses as the rain and floods can never destroy, which shall protect you from the changes and chances of this life. This is the instruction of Him Whom the world hath wronged and forsaken.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 261​

Now the Trinity? The Baha'i link you gave said: "So the Reality of Christ was a clear and polished mirror of the greatest purity and fineness." Now does that apply to every manifestation? All were perfectly polished mirrors? I've asked this before. Was Adam a perfectly polished mirror? Was Abraham? Was Moses? There is nothing in the Jewish Scriptures that would imply that. Would anyone ever equate any of them with being "God in the flesh"?

All the Manifestations of God were perfectly polished mirrors. Some of the Manifestations of God such as Jesus and Baha’u’llah reflected more of the Light of God because of the potency of their revelation.None of them were God in the flesh. God cannot become flesh.

Because of a few verses in the gospels, Christian leaders came up with the Trinity. They made Jesus God, because of their interpretation of those verses. But one of the main things Christians use to show that Jesus is God is that he rose from the dead. Baha'is say that he didn't literally rise from the dead... that his physical body is dead and gone.

Baha'is don't agree with the NT. They don't agree with Christian interpretation of it, so why use it? Especially, when you pull a verse or two out and use it as if it is the truth.

Even if Jesus rose from the dead that would not prove He was God. There is no connection whatsoever, except in the minds of some Christians.

I do not use the NT for anything except what I pointed out above. Some of the NT is the truth and I can differentiate between stories and spiritual truths. There is no reason why I have to agree with the Christian interpretation of the NT in order to believe it and quote it once in a while. Baha’u’llah did not say that the older scriptures were abrogated, He said that the older religious dispensations were abrogated. The older scriptures are all part of the religion of God but they have been corrupted by changes made to them and by misinterpretations, so they are not very useful. The spiritual verities are still valid but the social teachings and laws of the older religions are out of date so they are not of any value in this new age.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then as far as you are concerned, the very fact that we have different religions, that throughout history have fought and killed one another with great glee, must also be part of what this "god" of yours wants. Because it is this "god" that you believe chooses messengers for their ability to make what this "god" wants known to the rest of us. And if that results in the confusion that kills -- even unto this very day -- then that must also be what this "god" wants.

In that case, you can keep it. And the messengers, too.

You cannot make assumptions about what God wants, not unless it was revealed through a Messenger.

What happened in the world is not why God wants just because it happens. God allows humans to do whatever they want to do, that is why we have free will, so humans are the ones who cause things to go awry in the world.

God revealed the different religions through Messengers in every age, and the universal religions such as Christianity and Islam should have been accepted by everyone in the world, but that was not possible back when they were revealed because we did not have the mass communications that we have in this age.

From what was revealed to Baha’u’llah we know that God never intended for there to be unity between the various religions until the present age. So what happens? God sends a new Messenger to establish world unity and world peace and most people reject that Messenger -- not God’s fault because people have free will to choose and they choose to cling to their older religions and will not relinquish them, like a baby clings to a baby blanket or a small child clings to a favorite toy – not God’s fault.

We will never have unity between the older religions because they are all so different. It is just not possible given human nature and the human ego. The adherents of the older religions might be able to learn to live together in relative peace but that is not the ideal situation. God has revealed a new religion to Baha’u’llah that is suited for the times we live in and that is what God wants everyone to follow in this new age. Until that happens you can expect to see disunity and strife, in various degrees.

“The One true God beareth Me witness, and His creatures will testify, that not for a moment did I allow Myself to be hidden from the eyes of men, nor did I consent to shield My person from their injury. Before the face of all men I have arisen, and bidden them fulfil My pleasure. My object is none other than the betterment of the world and the tranquillity of its peoples. The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 286​

It has never been God’s fault that humans rejected His Messengers because we all have free will to choose. I have chosen to follow the Messenger that God wants me to follow because that is the logical way to proceed, given an All-Knowing and All-Wise God knows what is best for me.

 

[Trailblazer]

Isn't He omnipotent? Can't He perform impressive miracles to sway the masses? Apparently He used to. Did He give it up?

What makes you think that God wants to sway the masses? Did those miracles work to sway the masses? What people believed about some of the miracles like the resurrection of Jesus swayed quite a few people, but that was a fantasy. Is it better to believe in a fantasy or in reality?

Isn't He also omniscient and thus able to weigh the results of any steps He might take?

I would guess that is what He does, but there is no reason to think God is looking for any particular results, not for Himself anyway, since God has no need for anything from humans. So if God wants results, it is only because He cares about humans and their welfare. But it is high time humans started to figure out what God revealed and try to put that plan in place, because God has done all He is going to do until He sends another Messenger, which won’t be for at least 833 years.

Could He not commandeer the airwaves and internet and issue a manifesto in all languages?
Couldn't He simply install a belief app in all human brains?
Couldn't He just poof away all military personnel?
The possibilities are endless....

I suppose God could do any number of things if He wanted to. So since God has not done what God can do we can logically deduce that God does not want to; and then we might want to ask why He does not want to do anything differently than He has already done...

Thus far any attempts at religious accord have pretty much fallen flat.

What reason do you have to think that religions that have been at odds for 5000 years are suddenly just going to start getting along and live in harmony? As long as they stay attached to their older religions there really is no hope for the future, as nothing will change... I know people do not like to hear this, but the older religions are like dead trees that need to be removed so a new trees can grow up in their place. This is logic 101. The analogies in this article explain this quite well.

How Dead Trees Brought Baha’i Principles to Life for Me

 

[Trailblazer]

So believing in a make believe God is better than not believing in God? What if all ideas and concepts of a Supreme Being are all man-made and make believe? Would it still be better to believe in these false gods?

I think it is better to believe in God than to believe in no God.

If all ideas and concepts of a Supreme Being are all man-made and make believe it would be better to be an atheist.

 

[Trailblazer]

One Baha'i has said that the leaders of Islam, starting with the Umayyads in 661, are the evil beasts from Revelation. That's pretty much the very beginning of Islam. So more than a 1000 years of being off "target" while being right about God at the same time?

What Baha’is say about the Book of Revelation is irrelevant. That was not the beginning of Islam. The Qur’an represents Islam and it is dead center, right on target.

 

[Trailblazer]

But the One True God has always sent messengers with the truth? That's kind of the point. People seem to have made up their own gods. And since the One God is said to have created everything less than 10,000 years ago... That he walked in the garden and spoke with Adam... That he flooded the whole world. He spoke from heaven. He showed Moses his backside... then maybe this one god is made up also? 'Cause I don't think you or any other Baha'i believe much of the Bible is literal, therefore, couldn't it just possibly be made up?

The Bible cannot be made up because Baha'u'llah wrote that it is God's greatest testimony to His creatures....
However, the Dispensation to which it applies has been abrogated......
The Bible is history and since it was recorded time has marched on.....

Maybe it is time to get your head out of the Bible and learn something *new*...

“Please God thou wilt turn thine eyes towards the Most Great Revelation, and entirely disregard these conflicting tales and traditions.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 174-175​

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 171-172​

 

[Vinayaka]

I was not speaking of your faith. I was speaking of one God vs. many gods.

I thought you said you believe in One God.

I do not speak for the Baha’i Faith. I am just one person who has an opinion. Certain beliefs are contradictory to other beliefs, such as one God/many gods. In other words, they cannot both be true. That does not mean the *people* who have those beliefs have to be at odds with each other.

I like variety, but I do not think that the variety of faiths is going to ever result in unity and harmony in the world. I suppose anything is possible but it just does not seem to be going in that direction. I think that eventually something has to give. That could be a gradual change or it could happen suddenly.

From what I know of them, I think Buddhism and Hinduism and are very peaceful and unobtrusive, but I think certain religions are detrimental to society. What effect do you think it has when 60% of the adult population in the United States believes that Jesus is coming back to fix everything that is wrong in the world, not to mention that many Christians believe that everyone else is going to hell when Jesus returns? Atheists are much more likely to make the necessary changes in the world, but unfortunately they are small in number.

I have never said I belive in one God. I believe in God and gods.
Belief is often contradictory, it's belief.

 

[Trailblazer]

Belief is often contradictory, it's belief.

But reality is not contradictory.
I do not want to believe in that which cannot exist.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You cannot make assumptions about what God wants, not unless it was revealed through a Messenger.

What happened in the world is not why God wants just because it happens. God allows humans to do whatever they want to do, that is why we have free will, so humans are the ones who cause things to go awry in the world.

God revealed the different religions through Messengers in every age, and the universal religions such as Christianity and Islam should have been accepted by everyone in the world, but that was not possible back when they were revealed because we did not have the mass communications that we have in this age.

From what was revealed to Baha’u’llah we know that God never intended for there to be unity between the various religions until the present age. So what happens? God sends a new Messenger to establish world unity and world peace and most people reject that Messenger -- not God’s fault because people have free will to choose and they choose to cling to their older religions and will not relinquish them, like a baby clings to a baby blanket or a small child clings to a favorite toy – not God’s fault.

We will never have unity between the older religions because they are all so different. It is just not possible given human nature and the human ego. The adherents of the older religions might be able to learn to live together in relative peace but that is not the ideal situation. God has revealed a new religion to Baha’u’llah that is suited for the times we live in and that is what God wants everyone to follow in this new age. Until that happens you can expect to see disunity and strife, in various degrees.

“The One true God beareth Me witness, and His creatures will testify, that not for a moment did I allow Myself to be hidden from the eyes of men, nor did I consent to shield My person from their injury. Before the face of all men I have arisen, and bidden them fulfil My pleasure. My object is none other than the betterment of the world and the tranquillity of its peoples. The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established. This unity can never be achieved so long as the counsels which the Pen of the Most High hath revealed are suffered to pass unheeded.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 286​

It has never been God’s fault that humans rejected His Messengers because we all have free will to choose. I have chosen to follow the Messenger that God wants me to follow because that is the logical way to proceed, given an All-Knowing and All-Wise God knows what is best for me.

You know, you would have made a good priest. The job of the priestly class has always been primarily about interpretation, not fact. In other religions, the priests didn't tell you how to do the Rain Dance properly, their job was to explain after the fact why it didn't work, if it didn't work, and why the people should continue to believe anyway, and leave something in the collection plate on the way out.

And that is what you do. You claim to believe in an all-powerful deity, and when it becomes clear to you that if there is such a thing, and He wants me to know something, there's no way that I won't know it. No "messengers" are required when omnipotence exists. What can be satisfactorily communicated to a messenger can just as easily be satisfactorily communicated to the intended audience.

But of course, that's not what we see happens, as I've explained to you -- so you undertake the priest's job of trying to explain my objection away. This is also known as "apologetics," for what seem to me obvious reasons.

But bringing up "free will" simply doesn't do it. I a father tells Johnny to go tell Billy to do something, and Billy gets it wrong but says, "I didn't understand what you wanted properly, because Johnny garbled it," the father has no real excuse for punishing Billy. But if the father tells Billy in plain words, directly, himself, and checks that Billy has properly understood, then that does not strip Billy of his free will to disobey anyway. But it does grant the father the right to exact what consequence was made clear at the outset.

But then, I am thinking with my reasoning brain, unclouded by the need to make what I see fit some arbitrary beliefs for which no evidence can be given.

 

[Vinayaka]

But reality is not contradictory.
I do not want to believe in that which cannot exist.

That may be true, but when people claim they know that reality, it's just their belief. They don't really know.

 

[Quintessence]

This topic really should be in its own thread, so I'll be brief and suggest if you want to explore this further, a new thread is in order and feel free to tag me on it.

I approach religion from logic, not from emotion. I know people like the idea of many gods, but there are either many gods or there is one God. Both cannot be true because they are logically contradictory.

Not really. Not if you understand the process of deification as something humans project onto the world rather than an intrinsic quality of it. Put another way, there's not a logical contradiction if you don't take it literally and understand that it's mythos (sacred story) - something both polytheists and monotheists are capable of doing.

I think in terms of what makes the most sense. The last three major religions -- Judaism, Christianity, and Islam -- championed one God, so it makes sense that there is one God. Also, I cannot understand why we would need any more than one God if God is omnipotent and omniscient, and if God does not have those characteristics He is not God, not to me.

This doesn't strike me as a compelling argument for monotheism.

The criticisms of "theism" leveled by atheists in the West fail to apply to polytheism because polytheism is not a threat to atheists. Older religions are generally not a threat, it is the newer religions that pose a threat.

The age of a religion isn't related to its level of "threat" as you put it. It has more to do with the fact that polytheistic religions are inherently pluralistic, which means they don't proselytize and try to convince you that they're right all the darned time.

Is the reason polytheists do not like one God because He is purportedly All-Powerful, All-Knowing and All-Wise, and that is somehow too overbearing, too controlling, threatening in some way, frightening?

Hahahaha!

No. Though I can see why some monotheists would want to believe this is the case. Keep in mind that because polytheism is... well... polytheism, it doesn't mean one doesn't like the one-god or rejects its existence. Heck, polytheism doesn't exclude the possibility of worshiping the one-god either. It just means it hasn't convinced us to be part of an exclusive fan club where no other gods are allowed.

How would polytheism handle the modern challenges we see in the world today better than monotheism?

That's a bit I'd rather leave to a different thread. The main problem I see with monotheistic thinking it's its "my way or the highway" mentality. In a global, multicultural society, that attitude is problematic. It's also an attitude that polytheism lacks.

 

[Valjean]

What makes you think that God wants to sway the masses? Did those miracles work to sway the masses? What people believed about some of the miracles like the resurrection of Jesus swayed quite a few people, but that was a fantasy. Is it better to believe in a fantasy or in reality?

If God doesn't want to sway the masses then I'd conclude He doesn't care what people believe. There would be no reason to send any messengers and no reason for anyone to pay any attention to them.

Yes, Jesus' miracles presumably swayed those who witnessed them, but before mass communication this could only go so far.

 

[CG Didymus]

What Baha’is say about the Book of Revelation is irrelevant. That was not the beginning of Islam. The Qur’an represents Islam and it is dead center, right on target.

Abdul Baha from "Some Answered Questions"
“The beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them”: 9 this beast means the Umayyads..."

So then, I suppose you've read the Quran and understand it? And it is on "target" but the leaders of Islam have been off since 661AD? So who, prior to Baha'u'llah, taught and lived by the truth of the Quran. And then, I suppose, you don't believe the Bible is on "target"? And, what about their leadership?

If you answer that the leadership in those religions were wrong, can you carry that over to include the leadership of all the major religions? If so, then why would anybody with half a brain, that saw through the hypocrisy, would believe in any of those religions... and, therefore, believe in the God that those religious leaders talked about as being true?

Then we have the leadership of the Baha'i Faith? Since I doubt they are perfect, then I'm sure their is some level of not being able to live up to a perfect standard of belief and behavior, which some could say that they too, were being hypocritical. So another religion that can't to lived up to? Or, will the real God intervene and transform people and miraculously give them the capacity to live at a high level of spirituality? If not, then judging God by how his people live, then there is no God.

 

[CG Didymus]

Maybe it is time to get your head out of the Bible and learn something *new*.

Maybe it's time you read the Bible for yourself and stop relying on what the Baha'i Faith tells you about it. Or, that's not part of "investigating the truth" and seeing with your own eyes? And you know my head isn't in the Bible. I'm just bothered how Baha'is cherry pick it to pieces to prove they are right, and then say the rest of it is misinterpreted or symbolic. Anybody can and does do that. Why does a "manifestation" have to do that? It makes me question the validity of what he says if true.

 

[Trailblazer]

And that is what you do. You claim to believe in an all-powerful deity, and when it becomes clear to you that if there is such a thing, and He wants me to know something, there's no way that I won't know it. No "messengers" are required when omnipotence exists. What can be satisfactorily communicated to a messenger can just as easily be satisfactorily communicated to the intended audience.

Hypothetically speaking, Messengers may or not be necessary but that is a moot point. The only salient point is that God chooses to use Messengers.

What completely eludes most atheists is that omnipotence does not only mean that God can do anything; it also means that God only does what God wants to do, which means God does not do anything God does not want to do. Obviously, God does not want to communicate to ordinary humans, because He could if He wanted to but He doesn’t.

There is more than one reason God uses Messengers but the primary reason is that ordinary humans could never understand communication directly from God because the ineffable God is far beyond the comprehension of an ordinary human.

“To every discerning and illumined heart it is evident that God, the unknowable Essence, the divine Being, is immensely exalted beyond every human attribute, such as corporeal existence, ascent and descent, egress and regress....... No tie of direct intercourse can possibly bind Him to His creatures. He standeth exalted beyond and above all separation and union, all proximity and remoteness. No sign can indicate His presence or His absence;”
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 98​

This is why God sends Messengers, an ethereal Being who has two natures... Because He has a divine nature and a human nature He can act as a Mediator between God and man.

“And since there can be no tie of direct intercourse to bind the one true God with His creation, and no resemblance whatever can exist between the transient and the Eternal, the contingent and the Absolute, He hath ordained that in every age and dispensation a pure and stainless Soul be made manifest in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself................The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67​

But of course, that's not what we see happens, as I've explained to you -- so you undertake the priest's job of trying to explain my objection away. This is also known as "apologetics," for what seem to me obvious reasons.

No, it is known as the Truth from God, since the Will of Baha’u’llah is identical to the Will of God.

But bringing up "free will" simply doesn't do it. I a father tells Johnny to go tell Billy to do something, and Billy gets it wrong but says, "I didn't understand what you wanted properly, because Johnny garbled it," the father has no real excuse for punishing Billy. But if the father tells Billy in plain words, directly, himself, and checks that Billy has properly understood, then that does not strip Billy of his free will to disobey anyway. But it does grant the father the right to exact what consequence was made clear at the outset.

Free will is not the main reason that God does not communicate directly to humans. The reason is stated above. No ordinary human could ever understand direct communication from God.

Who said that there will be any punishments inflicted by God? Those who do not believe will simply not get the reward they could have had.

“He who shall accept and believe, shall receive his reward; and he who shall turn away, shall receive none other than his own punishment.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 339​

But then, I am thinking with my reasoning brain, unclouded by the need to make what I see fit some arbitrary beliefs for which no evidence can be given.

When you said “What can be satisfactorily communicated to a messenger can just as easily be satisfactorily communicated to the intended audience” you are not thinking with my reasoning brain because you are assuming that God could communicate directly to humans based upon ONE attribute of God – omnipotence – but you really have no way of knowing if God could communicate directly to humans.

Not only that, but you do not even bother to think about the other factors involved, namely humans’ ability to understand an ineffable God. Of course, since you have no knowledge of the nature of God that is understandable. Apparently, you think God speaking to a human is just like a human speaking to another human; but it’s not, because God is not a human.

Maybe it also never occurred to you that if God spoke directly to you, there would be no way to verify that it was actually God speaking. I have been discussing direct communication from God to everyone with an atheist on another forum for about five years and only within the last week did we get around to discussing verification as a factor. He had to admit that if people heard from God, there would be no way for them to verify that it was really the Voice of God as opposed to a delusion or their imagination. I could barely believe what he said after that... He said it would not matter if the Voice was a real God or not, all that would matter is that people believed it was a real God. In other words, God might not even exist, so everybody who hears from God could be believing in an imaginary god. What’s the point?

 

[Trailblazer]

That may be true, but when people claim they know that reality, it's just their belief. They don't really know.

If you are saying that they could be wrong, that is possible, but that is not a good reason to increase the chance of being wrong by adhering to beliefs that are logically contradictory or scientifically impossible. Why would God create humans with the ability to use reason and logic if we are not supposed to use that capacity?

It boggles my imagination how so many people could believe that Jesus rose from the dead and floated up into the sky and will someday descend from the sky and restore the world to a Garden of Eden instantly, with the wave of a magic wand, all based upon the belief that “God/Jesus is omnipotent so He can do anything.”

And you wonder why I am a Baha’i. Nothing Baha’is believe contradicts science. The only supernatural Baha’i beliefs are the existence of a soul and a spiritual world, but they are outside the purview of science so they do not contradict science.

 

[Trailblazer]

This topic really should be in its own thread, so I'll be brief and suggest if you want to explore this further, a new thread is in order and feel free to tag me on it.

I may or may not remember to do that but I will probably see the thread if it is in General Religious Debates.

Not really. Not if you understand the process of deification as something humans project onto the world rather than an intrinsic quality of it. Put another way, there's not a logical contradiction if you don't take it literally and understand that it's mythos (sacred story) - something both polytheists and monotheists are capable of doing.

So are you saying is that it is okay to believe in a myth, something that is not even real, something humans project onto the world?I believe that humans can potentially reflect the attributes of God, but I do not believe we can project God into the world.

This doesn't strike me as a compelling argument for monotheism.

Why not?

The age of a religion isn't related to its level of "threat" as you put it. It has more to do with the fact that polytheistic religions are inherently pluralistic, which means they don't proselytize and try to convince you that they're right all the darned time.

But how is this related to whether the religions are actually true or false? (I mean reality vs. fantasy). Moreover, all adherents to monotheistic religions do not try to convince people they are right. Jews certainly don’t, not unless you ask them. Most Muslims do not proselytize either.

Hahahaha!

No. Though I can see why some monotheists would want to believe this is the case. Keep in mind that because polytheism is... well... polytheism, it doesn't mean one doesn't like the one-god or rejects its existence. Heck, polytheism doesn't exclude the possibility of worshiping the one-god either. It just means it hasn't convinced us to be part of an exclusive fan club where no other gods are allowed.

Sorry, but this seems strange to me. I do not mean any disrespect but I cannot understand how there can be more than one God, because I cannot see a need for many gods. Perhaps it would be a good idea for me to read about the underlying premises of polytheism if there is one. There is an agnostic poster I know on another forum who insists there are billions of gods.... But why would there be? This seems to me like anthropomorphizing gods and making them into humans. A legitimate belief would be that there are many angels though, because humans can become angels.

That's a bit I'd rather leave to a different thread. The main problem I see with monotheistic thinking it's its "my way or the highway" mentality. In a global, multicultural society, that attitude is problematic. It's also an attitude that polytheism lacks

But if monotheism is the highway that leads to the One True God, then that is the highway everyone should be taking, Imo. Moreover, I do not think it is possible to go back in time, to the days when polytheism was the majority. We have now fast forwarded to monotheism, so I think it is here to stay. The question is, which religion is going to prevail? I suppose they can coexist for a while, but I do not see how we will ever have world unity as long as we have so many religions, all believing they are “the one.” Moreover, how much longer are Jews going to wait for their Messiah, and how much longer are Christians going to wait for Jesus to return, till hell freezes over?

 

[Trailblazer]

If God doesn't want to sway the masses then I'd conclude He doesn't care what people believe. There would be no reason to send any messengers and no reason for anyone to pay any attention to them.

That is not logical because it is all or nothing thinking. Just because God does not care if everyone believes in His Messenger that does not mean God does not care if anyone believes in Him. There is a reason for Messengers because some people will believe in them, enough people to get the religion off the ground. The after a while many more will hop on board. This is the pattern we see in religious history. Most people do not like the new Messenger at first, especially if he is different from the other Messengers, and especially if He brings new teachings and laws and a new message that is very different from what their religion teaches. Only a few people will swim against the tide and blaze new trails, like a Trailblazer.

Yes, Jesus' miracles presumably swayed those who witnessed them, but before mass communication this could only go so far.

And that is another good point. Miracles are only proof for those who witness them. Even now, with mass communications, miracles could not be performed for all to see. Many Christians believe that when Jesus returns he will appear in the sky for all to see, but how is this possible if He returns at one location? I guess they did not really think this through.

Oh, but God is omnipotent so God can do anything! This is the answer I usually get... And people wonder why I prefer posting to atheists, and now I add polytheists to my list....

 

[Trailblazer]

Abdul Baha from "Some Answered Questions"
“The beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them”: 9 this beast means the Umayyads..."

So then, I suppose you've read the Quran and understand it? And it is on "target" but the leaders of Islam have been off since 661AD? So who, prior to Baha'u'llah, taught and lived by the truth of the Quran. And then, I suppose, you don't believe the Bible is on "target"? And, what about their leadership?

No, I have not read the Qur'an but I believe what Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi said about it being the Word of God and authentic, compared to the Bible which is not wholly authentic.

I do not know about the religious leaders of Islm and when they went astray... I only know that they did go astray from what Bahai;;ah wrote in the Kitab-i-Iqan. The same applies to the religious leaders of Christianity.

No, I do not believe that the Bible is on target, but it is not completely off target either... And as Baha'u'llah said, it was all the Christians had until the Qur'an was revealed. Only in certain instances has the Bible been corrupted. Addressing the Muslims, Baha’u’llah wrote:

“We have also heard a number of the foolish of the earth assert that the genuine text of the heavenly Gospel doth not exist amongst the Christians, that it hath ascended unto heaven. How grievously they have erred! How oblivious of the fact that such a statement imputeth the gravest injustice and tyranny to a gracious and loving Providence! How could God, when once the Day-star of the beauty of Jesus had disappeared from the sight of His people, and ascended unto the fourth heaven, cause His holy Book, His most great testimony amongst His creatures, to disappear also?” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 89

“Our purpose in relating these things is to warn you that were they to maintain that those verses wherein the signs referred to in the Gospel are mentioned have been perverted, were they to reject them, and cling instead to other verses and traditions, you should know that their words were utter falsehood and sheer calumny. Yea “corruption” of the text, in the sense We have referred to, hath been actually effected in particular instances.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, p. 88​

If you answer that the leadership in those religions were wrong, can you carry that over to include the leadership of all the major religions? If so, then why would anybody with half a brain, that saw through the hypocrisy, would believe in any of those religions... and, therefore, believe in the God that those religious leaders talked about as being true?

Yes, the religious leaders of all the religions went astray, but that does not mean that the religious scriptures are no good. It just means they have to be interpreted differently than the leaders interpreted them.

Then we have the leadership of the Baha'i Faith? Since I doubt they are perfect, then I'm sure their is some level of not being able to live up to a perfect standard of belief and behavior, which some could say that they too, were being hypocritical. So another religion that can't to lived up to? Or, will the real God intervene and transform people and miraculously give them the capacity to live at a high level of spirituality? If not, then judging God by how his people live, then there is no God.

The Baha'i leadership is only as good as the people who are elected to the institutions. These institutions are only in their infancy and they will grow and evolve over time. Hopefully, as the Baha'is become more spiritual they will reflect that. It is a work in progress.

The real God is not going to intervene and help people grow spiritually. God gave us that job to do ourselves.
You cannot judge God by how people live. That is so illogical. Humans have free will so they are responsible for their own actions.

 

[Trailblazer]

Maybe it's time you read the Bible for yourself and stop relying on what the Baha'i Faith tells you about it. Or, that's not part of "investigating the truth" and seeing with your own eyes? And you know my head isn't in the Bible. I'm just bothered how Baha'is cherry pick it to pieces to prove they are right, and then say the rest of it is misinterpreted or symbolic. Anybody can and does do that. Why does a "manifestation" have to do that? It makes me question the validity of what he says if true.

Independent investigation of truth does not include looking at old scriptures because the truth for this age is in the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. But IF I was going to spend my time reading other religious scriptures, I would first read the Qur'an and then the Hindu and Buddhist scriptures.

Think about it from this perspective. The world is only 33% Christian and 0.2% Jewish, which means that two thirds of the world population does not believe in the Bible. 22% of the world population is Muslims, 14% of the world population is Hindus, and 8% is Buddhists. I consider it completely disrespectful to those other major religions to put the Bible up on a pedestal, as if it is the only religious scripture, the only Word of God. That is just so arrogant.

I have no interest in the Bible and I have no reason to read it unless I am looking something up because of a discussion I am having with a Christian. I am not the other Baha'is and I do not cherry pick the Bible to prove anything. All I do is refer to prophecies that prove that Baha'u'llah was who He claimed to be if I am in a discussion about that.

There is no contest between the Bible and the Writings of Baha'u'llah. The former was revealed for thousands of years ago and the latter was revealed for the present age. That is now I view it and how I will continue to view it because it is logical.