• 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!

Is this logical?

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I think that the Angel Moroni told him where to find some golden plates. And he needed some special things to read them and translate what was written on the plates. And, those writings became the Book of Mormon, which tells of Jesus having been in North America? And Baha'is are okay with that? Or, just you?
If he said Jesus had been in North America I am not okay with that because a dead man cannot be in North America.
Here's part of Micah 7 from a Jewish Bible, not the Christian King James. Quite a few significant differences. "They" instead of "he" in verse 12. And Egypt being mentioned?

10 Then mine enemy shall see it, and shame shall cover her; who said unto me: Where is the LORD thy God? Mine eyes shall gaze upon her; now shall she be trodden down as the mire of the streets.'
11 'The day for building thy walls, even that day, shall be far removed.'
12 There shall be a day when they shall come unto thee, from Assyria even to the cities of Egypt, and from Egypt even to the River, and from sea to sea, and from mountain to mountain.
י 13 And the land shall be desolate for them that dwell therein, because of the fruit of their doings. {P}
י
14 Tend Thy people with Thy staff, the flock of Thy heritage, that dwell solitarily, as a forest in the midst of the fruitful field; let them feed in Bashan and Gilead, as in the days of old.
טו 15 'As in the days of thy coming forth out of the land of Egypt will I show unto him marvellous things.'
16 The nations shall see and be put to shame for all their might; they shall lay their hand upon their mouth, their ears shall be deaf.
י. 17 They shall lick the dust like a serpent; like crawling things of the earth they shall come trembling out of their close places; they shall come with fear unto the LORD our God, and shall be afraid because of Thee.
18 Who is a God like unto Thee, that pardoneth the iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of His heritage? He retaineth not His anger for ever, because He delighteth in mercy.
י. 19 He will again have compassion upon us; He will subdue our iniquities; and Thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea.
כ 20 Thou wilt show faithfulness to Jacob, mercy to Abraham, as Thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.
There are also quite a few significant differences in other translations of the Christian Bible.
Micah 7:12 - Bible Gateway

Logically speaking, how can anyone ever know which translation is correct?
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
If he said Jesus had been in North America I am not okay with that because a dead man cannot be in North America.

There are also quite a few significant differences in other translations of the Christian Bible.
Micah 7:12 - Bible Gateway

Logically speaking, how can anyone ever know which translation is correct?
Yeah, it's hard to say what is true when the supposed book of Truth, The Bible, can be translated so many ways which then leads to even greater variations of interpretations.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
I think it wise to check and recheck the facts about those claiming to be the return of Christ. I get the feeling that some of them might not really be Christ. From Wiki:
This is a partial list of notable people who have been claimed, either by themselves or by their followers, in some way to be the reincarnation or incarnation of Jesus, or the Second Coming of Christ.
19th century
  • John Nichols Thom (1799–1838), a Cornish tax rebel who claimed to be the "saviour of the world" and the reincarnation of Jesus Christ in 1834. He was killed by British soldiers at the Battle of Bossenden Wood, on 31 May 1838 in Kent, England.[3]
  • Arnold Potter (1804–1872), Schismatic Latter Day Saint leader; he claimed the spirit of Jesus Christ entered into his body and he became "Potter Christ" Son of the living God. He died in an attempt to "ascend into heaven" by jumping off a cliff. His body was later retrieved and buried by his followers.[4]
  • Jones Very (1813–1880), American essayist, poet, literary scholar, and Greek tutor at Harvard who befriended several prominent American Transcendentalists and suffered a nervous breakdown in 1837 after which he claimed to have become the Second Coming of Jesus.
  • Bahá'u'lláh (1817–1892), born Shiite, adopted Bábism later in 1844,[5] he claimed to be the prophesied fulfillment and Promised One of major religions including Hinduism, Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Christianity and Islam. He founded the Bahá'í Faith in 1863.[6] Followers of the Bahá'í Faith believe that the fulfillment of the prophecies of the second coming of Jesus, as well as the prophecies of the 5th Buddha Maitreya and many other religious prophecies, were begun by the Báb in 1844 and then by Bahá'u'lláh. They commonly compare the fulfillment of Christian prophecies to Jesus' fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, where in both cases people were expecting the literal fulfillment of apocalyptic statements.[7]
  • William W. Davies (1833–1906), leader of a Latter Day Saint schismatic group called the Kingdom of Heaven located in Walla Walla, Washington from 1867 to 1881. He taught his followers that he was the archangel Michael, who had previously lived as the biblical Adam, Abraham, and David. When his son Arthur was born on 11 February 1868, Davies declared that the infant was the reincarnated Jesus Christ.[8][9] When Davies's second son, David, was born in 1869, he was declared to be God the Father.[8]
  • Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, India (1835–1908), claimed to be the awaited Mahdi as well as (Second Coming) and likeness of Jesus, the promised Messiah at the end of time. He claimed to be Jesus in the metaphorical sense; in character. He founded the Ahmadiyya Movement in 1889, envisioning it to be the rejuvenation of Islam, and claimed to be commissioned by God for the reformation of mankind.
Thank you for that excellent list those excellent lists. I'm sure Trailblazer will now more clearly understand the error of her ways.




Nah! She will just use the same logic that many use regarding God: "Just because most of them are not real does not mean mine is not real.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
You can choose Option #b if you want to. I choose Option #a.

I believe that Muhammad was a Manifestation of God, not a con man.
Evidence is evidence: "Islamic Contributions To Civilization Stanwood Cobb"

Joseph Smith was a seer, but the other two were delusional and/or con men.... IMO.


And the other hundred or so listed by CG Didymus. All frauds, or con men, or delusional. Their followers? All deluded.

All except you and yours. Uh huh.


As Vinayaka said...
And each and every one of them totally believed it, as did their followers. Grandiose delusion, anyone? You forgot all the ones that didn't get famous enough to get on to wiki, probably at least another 10 000 or so, maybe more.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Okay, you have asked me three times now, so I cannot see anyone could blame me for answering your questions. I will post one that “I consider good” <snip>
Micah 7:12 “In that day also he shall come even to thee from Assyria, and from the fortified cities, and from the fortress even to the river, and from sea to sea, and from mountain to mountain.”


You already posted about Micah. I already debunked Micah.

From:

Your notions of consice and accurate are very different from most peoples notions of precise and accurate.

How is "In that day" concise and accurate? It's no better than, "once upon a time".

Where's he coming from? Somewhere "from sea to sea, and from mountain to mountain."

Most important, you and your Bahai mentors intentionally fail to put the verse into context:

Where is the LORD thy God? ... 12In that day also he shall come even to thee from Assyria, and from the fortified cities, and from the fortress even to the river, and from sea to sea, and from mountain to mountain.

Is this a prophecy about 's coming? Nah. It clearly says "Where is the Lord"? Going forward...He (The Lord thy God) is coming...
Is your memory so bad that you don't even remember our conversation about Micah? It's only about three pages back.

Do you not remember stating that Baha'u'llah is not God If Baha'u'llah is not God the Lord he cannot be the entity referred to in Micah.

When I said you have failed to post even one prophecy, I was certainly including your failed Micah.

 

ecco

Veteran Member
So far, the only "actual Manifestation of God" you admit to is your Baluluah. Since Baluluah didn't write any of the OT or NT, you don't believe any of the OT or the NT - Right?
No, that is not true at all. Here is the short list of Manifestations of God:
Abraham, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha’u’llah.

What does Muhammed, or anyone in your list, have to do with your beliefs about the OT and NT? Did you not understand my comment at all?




There might be some others, but that would depends upon which Prophets are to be considered Universal Manifestations of God

Don't you know which Prophets are to be considered Universal Manifestations of God?
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
A claim isn't evidence, it is a claim.



No it isn't,.



Delusional



Delusional

I believe claims are evidence. They can be true or false evidence but what is evident is what is there and what is there is the claim.

I believe what is tried and true but you are delusional because you decide on something in your own mind where things can be quite imaginary.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
No, what he is saying is that no God has ever been observed communicating directly to everyone, but that does not mean that if God existed God would not communicate directly to everyone.

How logical is that?

I believe it has too many negatives. I think one can think of a straw man God as being anything you want to make it but the true God has definite attributes.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
So some old geezer says that God spoke to him. Other old geezers wrote down what that other old geezer said and did. Then, some other old geezers said that what those other old geezers wrote about that first old geezer is the Word of God. Then and another old geezer says that God spoke to him and said that the other old geezer was right on, but what was written about him was wrong, and that the old geezers that said it was the "literal" Word of God were wrong too. That now we should believe in the new old geezer because what he wrote is the Word of God. I kind of get it. If an old geezer says it's true, somebody's going to believe him.

i believe it isn't that way. A person was considered to have heard from God if his prophecies come true. Only a person in the future can determine that unless there is an immediate fulfillment.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Nah! She will just use the same logic that many use regarding God: "Just because most of them are not real does not mean mine is not real.
Yeah, it says that many will come in his name but don't listen to them, but none of them are him. That when he comes, everyone will know it. Most people still don't know of Baha'u'llah. But, then again, it's trusting what the NT writers said that Jesus said... and as Trailblazer so eloquently put it:
Logically speaking, how can anyone ever know which translation is correct?
But then what do we do?
You really need to think about what you just wrote.
Yes, let's think about this. Jesus rose from the dead? BS. Creation? BS The Flood? BS. So what do we believe about the Hebrew Bible and the NT? You guessed it... the prophecies. They are all accurate.

Like when it says a "virgin" will give birth to a son, you can believe that it means Jesus was born of a virgin. There is no doubt about the word translated as "virgin". There is no doubt about those verses, I mean the one verse, when taken in context, is a Messianic prophecy. When one gospel writer, whom we assume was Matthew, says that Jesus went to Egypt, thus fulfilling a prophecy, we can trust that one writer knows what he is talking about.

So if a translation, in this case the KJV, says that Baha'u'llah went from city to city and mountain to mountain, we can believe it. We just have to remember, that when it comes to fulfilling prophecy, the translation that best fits the events is the true one.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
i believe it isn't that way. A person was considered to have heard from God if his prophecies come true. Only a person in the future can determine that unless there is an immediate fulfillment.
The context of that sarcastic remark is... That Baha'is believe the Bible is from God. And usually, I divide the Bible into two parts, the Hebrew Bible and the NT, because Jews have their own interpretation concerning their Scriptures. But, this is about Christians and Baha'is. The Baha'is interpret the Bible to say something completely different than what Christians believe it to be saying. The "old geezer" part is that Jesus wrote nothing. We are depended on what his followers told us about him. How accurate are they? Next, the early church leaders had to decide which books got into the NT. Did they get it right? Then, through the centuries, "old geezers" have told us all what to believe about the Bible. And now, what do we do with this guy, Baha'u'llah, that says he is the return of Christ? Here we are in the future. Did he fulfill the prophecies?
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
The context of that sarcastic remark is... That Baha'is believe the Bible is from God. And usually, I divide the Bible into two parts, the Hebrew Bible and the NT, because Jews have their own interpretation concerning their Scriptures. But, this is about Christians and Baha'is. The Baha'is interpret the Bible to say something completely different than what Christians believe it to be saying. The "old geezer" part is that Jesus wrote nothing. We are depended on what his followers told us about him. How accurate are they? Next, the early church leaders had to decide which books got into the NT. Did they get it right? Then, through the centuries, "old geezers" have told us all what to believe about the Bible. And now, what do we do with this guy, Baha'u'llah, that says he is the return of Christ? Here we are in the future. Did he fulfill the prophecies?
I figured out an apparent contradiction resolution that may be of use to Christians, but probably not.

I said that the belief in Jesus being the ONLY way couldn't apply to Baha'i because they have Baha'ullah, but then, as usual was told I was wrong. Baha'is apparently do believe that Jesus is the only way. The 'rationalising' for that is that Baha'ullah and Jesus are one and the same, according to Baha'i. What Christians just get so wrong is that they don't see that Jesus is Baha'ullah.

It's like reading a good comic book some days.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I figured out an apparent contradiction resolution that may be of use to Christians, but probably not.

I said that the belief in Jesus being the ONLY way couldn't apply to Baha'i because they have Baha'ullah, but then, as usual was told I was wrong. Baha'is apparently do believe that Jesus is the only way. The 'rationalising' for that is that Baha'ullah and Jesus are one and the same, according to Baha'i. What Christians just get so wrong is that they don't see that Jesus is Baha'ullah.

It's like reading a good comic book some days.
You almost have it right. Jesus and Baha'u'llah are one in essence. Christians don't see that. They think Jesus, the body, is still alive. I don't know where they get that foolish notion? But anyway, Baha'u'llah is the return of the Spirit of Christ. Christ being the "anointed one". That Spirit that was in Jesus is the same Spirit that was in Baha'u'llah. It's like you have two lamps in your room. They both look different, yet... it is the same electricity that makes them illumine thine quarters.

It's like if one man digs a well and his neighbor digs a well and taps into the same underground water supply, but takes so much water that the other man's well is no longer deep enough. Thus, we can say that both men were well diggers. And, for a time both drew water from their wells. But now, the new well is the only one that still is bringing the life giving waters. The other guy is S.O. L. His well is no longer bringing forth water. His well, it could be said, in the past, was the "only" way to get water. Now, the other man's well is truly the only new and better way to get water.

This new well digger is Baha'u'llah. The old one was Jesus. He don't got it going anymore. But... there shall ariseth many false well diggers. They try and tap into the Great Ones water supply, but don't go deep enough, in other words, they don't reach the truth of God, the source. They, by not going deep enough, only draw mud. And thus it is. The end.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
Is this logical? Why or why not?

God not communicating directly to everyone is an observation, something known. However, it does not follow that, since it is observable that God does not communicate directly to everyone, that this means that if God existed God would not communicate directly to everyone.

(Note: I did not write this.)
It takes two to communicate.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
And the other hundred or so listed by CG Didymus. All frauds, or con men, or delusional. Their followers? All deluded.

All except you and yours. Uh huh.
Anyone can make a claim to Prophethood but it would be ridiculous to believe that every man who claims to be a Prophet of God actually is one. Yes, I believe all but two were all frauds, or con men, or delusional, and as such their followers are deluded.

However, followers of the true religions of the past are not deluded because their religions were established by real Messengers of God/Prophets.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You already posted about Micah. I already debunked Micah.
You did not debunk it, you just think you did.
Is your memory so bad that you don't even remember our conversation about Micah? It's only about three pages back.
I remember you responding to just the verse, and I responded to that so there is no need to respond again. At that time I had not posted the details regarding how Baha’u’llah fulfilled the prophecy. Now try to debunk that.
Do you not remember stating that Baha'u'llah is not God If Baha'u'llah is not God the Lord he cannot be the entity referred to in Micah.
Baha’u’llah was not God, but He was the Lord of Hosts, which is what those verses were referring to.
 
Top