What would be evidence that God exists?

[CG Didymus]

Do other religions rely upon other religions in order to believe that their religions are true?

The Abrahamic ones sure seem to. And the Baha'is tie in the others by claiming that they too came from God and are part of a progression. There has to be continuity, so that's why some of us need an explanation of why there seems to be contradictions.

Why does it matter what all the past religions taught? You will never reconcile all the older religions because none of them represent what was originally revealed to the Messengers of those religions. They have all been changed and corrupted by man.

If a past religion teaches something that works... like a meditation technique or something, then the teachings from that religion might just have something that other religions don't have.

And how do we know they don't represent the "original" teachings? You're opening yourself up to some more of the "What's your proof?" questions. Like even with the example of meditation. I never even heard of such a things until Buddhist and Hindus came to the U.S. and started teaching those things. It was profoundly different than the nothing I got out of going to Church services. All that stuff about breathing techniques and the chakras, and even hatha yoga. Baha'is don't have that. Should we just dump all that stuff out?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why do you say, "Case closed"? You talk about some of us being "arrogant" or the "epitome" of ego.

I meant that my case is closed because I have nothing more to say on the subject.
I was saying it is ego if people believe they can interpret the prophecies perfectly

By not "perfectly" fulfilling prophecies, I mean some of them are too vague and/or contrived. And, allegedly, we do have someone who is perfect and able to "unseal" the books and reveal their true meanings, Baha'u'llah. Did he explain how he fulfilled the prophecies of all the religions? No. At best, the Baha'is have tried to explain the Book of Revelation and Bible prophecies, but not very well.

No, Baha'u'llah did not explain how He fulfilled the prophecies of all the religions because that was not necessary nor was it part of His mission or His responsibility. He explained what the evidence was to support His claims as I told you in a previous post.

Abdul Baha's explanations of a couple of chapters in Revelation aren't that good. And, Bill Sears? Why would his be better than Abdul Baha's? It's just his very biased toward the Baha'i Faith explanations. An earthquake in Portugal years before The Bab declared his mission? Do you really accept that as a prophecy fulfillment? But you've put that out there as if we are supposed to. It was thousands of miles away and decades before? Same with the meteor shower and "dark" day. These are far from "perfect" fulfillments.

I do not expect anyone to accept anything. I accept it because I already know who Baha'u'llah was so everything Sears wrote fits together for me. But I do not believe in Baha'u'llah based upon prophecy fulfillment even though the prophecies were fulfilled.

 

[Trailblazer]

If a past religion teaches something that works... like a meditation technique or something, then the teachings from that religion might just have something that other religions don't have.

All that stuff about breathing techniques and the chakras, and even hatha yoga. Baha'is don't have that. Should we just dump all that stuff out?

You don't have to dump anything out as none of those practices are prohibited in the Baha'i Faith.

 

[rational experiences]

The male rationale said, the concept of God in spirit is the heavenly spirit gases, which own burning. Historically in space by natural vacuum laws, the gases released out of the 1st One God stone, was from the volcano.....who he compared sexually to his own penis. Said the God body had a sexual release into the womb of space, where the Immaculate heavenly body emerged.

Was burning gases in space, through vacuum cooling eventuated into clear cold gases.

Then the Sun attacked Earth in a big bang blast, the rebelled God body a Sun...and the interaction/reaction eventually stopped. Earth survived. Reaction ended in science thesis. Earth went back to owning burning gases in the spatial vacuum, for the law of space quotes that the gases naturally were already burning in its natural history.

If that reasoning were not real, then the Immaculate gases would have instantly all been burnt up, and no heavenly body would even exist in space conditions as history of the past.

What is relative.

Today Father told me, common sense, his spirit male spiritual yet not a science mind psyche existed first after the ice age. We returned to life, came back out of the eternal spirit, new animal spirit small life bodies, and 2 parents. The answer to the question where was the higher place where everything came from.

If the question did not exist, then nor would a need to answer that question. We would not own the question unless it is realised to be a true aware status/statement for a human life.

So our Father said when the life evolved in what condition would evolution own?

Water amassing, replacing, oxygenation and more microbes. The human life developed into a changed DNA life, the higher self emerged, scientist.

Which proves historically that the higher self was not in science in the past any Satanic evil self, a rational intelligent higher life living spiritual male group owned scientific creation....versus survival. As a rationally stated history.

Therefore in human life as we healed and re evolved, then spiritual intelligent new ideas and human male expressed beliefs, that involved past documented preaching/teachings emerged. Common sense details the reason why.

So if you lose your ground water mass use for a healthy non sacrificed cell and blood life to extra cloud amassing so that it continues to flood everywhere as the evidence...then today we live the evidence.

Science, the status for thinking. When you think of a human in the past do you envision a deceased human brother, as a dead thing? No, the answer is I image him living his life, yet he is in fact in science deceased. The place where image lies to everyone...for imagery/vision and thinking is just a concept.

So when you think today using image, the self claims non stop life, for the vision of the thoughts is about non stop life. Yet in reality life dies.

How self imagery and brother self status idolisation of self came about, rationally.

So if you knew that O circulation movement in the spatial heavens as gas/spirit in the deep on the face of water, was the description G O D as O G spiral to O and then O splits D/D back to O O....then you said GOD in the heavenly mass is G O O D. And in co ordination reality the GOD first one stone seal remained sealed, with no radiation removal.

Why G O D as a heavenly and first/one explanation in the sciences, the HOLY SEE, what you see first is reality. What you use as a word secondly is a natural advice usage.....when you use the word a third time to force impose change is when you did evil in science, and G O D changed.

So then you claimed O became a spirit gas movement of J E S U S in a cellular SIN gain. So said the reason why life is living saved sacrificed as JESUS...meaning everyone still living today lives in a J E S U S O atmospheric circulation cause.

Why we are all still being sacrificed in life for we follow J E S U S O and no longer G O D. For they removed circulating natural movement of the outcome of G O D gases burning/gases spatial cooling vacuum on the face of water, whose mass increased to own human images, to allow for FLOODING to cool the burning Earth gases.

Which had not ceased to be irradiated due to one/first O GOD stone body releasing its activated radiation in spatial vacuum activation, on the day of the death/sacrifice of GOD O the Earth, O G O D in the atmosphere to the state of Jesus.

So we knew a lot of humans and animals died in the J E S U S...we reason the only reason we are all still living is due to atmospheric FLOODING that took our natural bio owned water use to cool the burning irradiating heavenly gases, the sacrifice of our life.

We have since lived with J E S U S in the heavens and were waiting for the 2012 spatial vacuum cause of giving us back G O D O as natural movement without floods.

We would have evolved biological again, natural health regained, nature and animal life would have changed, it would have given us a better brain chemical psyche. Humans would have normalised back to a non mutative/sick humanity.

How it was relativity taught the movement of spirit on the face of water in the HEAVENLY body above our heads had converted and changed.

So all of us still live as Jesus did, baby new born mutated/sacrificed as is the adult life....so we follow Jesus, actually.

 

[Truthseeker]

If a past religion teaches something that works... like a meditation technique or something, then the teachings from that religion might just have something that other religions don't have.

And how do we know they don't represent the "original" teachings? You're opening yourself up to some more of the "What's your proof?" questions. Like even with the example of meditation. I never even heard of such a things until Buddhist and Hindus came to the U.S. and started teaching those things. It was profoundly different than the nothing I got out of going to Church services. All that stuff about breathing techniques and the chakras, and even hatha yoga. Baha'is don't have that. Should we just dump all that stuff out?

It's hard to know sometimes what represents the original religion, but if the Hindus and Buddhists do some things that is time tested and works, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not good at the kind of meditation where you sit there and wait for inspiration, my mind wanders all over the place. There are different kinds of meditations that different Hindus and Buddhists do. One some Buddhists do is to try to expand our love out to everybody, including people we don't like. I tried that, but I have a hard time purchasing a feeling of love like I want to for other people. I probably gave up on it too quick. For the Baha'is, the ideal is to love God or the Manifestation, and to see those same attributes that the Manifestation has in other people and love that, or at least understand if they reflect little of that that the potential is there and love them for that potential, and of course be concerned for their spiritual welfare. The Buddhists are similar in trying to be concerned for the welfare of all life, and trying to reflect the Buddha nature as a guidance for others.

I ponder on the Baha'i Writings at length these days, especially the Hidden Words. I need to do more to apply what I perceive from my ponderings.

 

[Truthseeker]

By not "perfectly" fulfilling prophecies, I mean some of them are too vague and/or contrived. And, allegedly, we do have someone who is perfect and able to "unseal" the books and reveal their true meanings, Baha'u'llah. Did he explain how he fulfilled the prophecies of all the religions? No. At best, the Baha'is have tried to explain the Book of Revelation and Bible prophecies, but not very well.

Baha'u'llah, if you consider carefully what what He said in the Book of Certitude, He showed the way to how to understand all prophecies, and also the spiritual prerequisites of what we need to find the truth.

Abdul Baha's explanations of a couple of chapters in Revelation aren't that good. And, Bill Sears? Why would his be better than Abdul Baha's? It's just his very biased toward the Baha'i Faith explanations. An earthquake in Portugal years before The Bab declared his mission? Do you really accept that as a prophecy fulfillment? But you've put that out there as if we are supposed to. It was thousands of miles away and decades before? Same with the meteor shower and "dark" day. These are far from "perfect" fulfillments.

I believe that Bill Sears tried too hard to find a literal fulfillment, when what we need is symbolic fulfillment. You have your own opinion of what Abdu'l-Baha said about a couple of chapters in Revelations and I have mine.

 

[Truthseeker]

I was around the Baha'i Faith for three years in the early 70's. They told me "When he the spirit of truth comes, he will lead you to all truth." They said Baha'u'llah is that spirit of truth promised by Jesus. I believed them. I trusted them. They told me that The Bab declared his mission in 1844. In that same year William Miller and his followers were waiting for Jesus to return, because of his calculations of prophecies in Daniel. I believed them. They told me all religions are one. That God sent different messengers at different times and in different places, but the essential message was always one. All these religions and their messengers were a progression, and just like in grade school, we go from one grade to another... ever advancing... ever learning. And now, we have a new messenger. Now is the time for all the world to unite as one.

What's not to like? I believed them. Until Jesus Freaks told me a completely different story. Until Hare Krishnas told me yet another story. Until Mormons told me another story. Until one Christian group told me a different story from another Christian group. I happened by a Jewish bookstore and asked, "The Baha'is and Christians say they all evolved from you guys. What do you say?" You guessed it... Yet another story.

You seem to depend on the stories people say, and don't see them for yourself, with your own eyes. Am I misunderstanding? I'm guessing at the times that Baha'is told you these things, you had little knowledge of other religions, and were trusting too much of what the Baha'is said, and didn't investigate and ponder on it yourself.

 

[Truthseeker]

The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? Or Vishnu? Or Quetzalcoatl?

They are different conceptions of God, but there is but one God.

 

[CG Didymus]

It's hard to know sometimes what represents the original religion, but if the Hindus and Buddhists do some things that is time tested and works, there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not good at the kind of meditation where you sit there and wait for inspiration, my mind wanders all over the place. There are different kinds of meditations that different Hindus and Buddhists do. One some Buddhists do is to try to expand our love out to everybody, including people we don't like. I tried that, but I have a hard time purchasing a feeling of love like I want to for other people. I probably gave up on it too quick. For the Baha'is, the ideal is to love God or the Manifestation, and to see those same attributes that the Manifestation has in other people and love that, or at least understand if they reflect little of that that the potential is there and love them for that potential, and of course be concerned for their spiritual welfare. The Buddhists are similar in trying to be concerned for the welfare of all life, and trying to reflect the Buddha nature as a guidance for others.

I ponder on the Baha'i Writings at length these days, especially the Hidden Words. I need to do more to apply what I perceive from my ponderings.

How can we ever know what the "original" message of Buddha, Krishna or Jesus was? But Baha'is have said the "originally" Krishna did not teach reincarnation, and that Buddha taught about the one true God, and that Paul changed the message of Jesus. Oh, and talk about changing things, that "originally" the Jewish Bible had Ishmael, not Isaac, being the son taken to be sacrificed.

So instead of showing how all religions are one and from the same source, the one true God, Baha'is change the beliefs, practices, and even the Scriptures of other religions to make them line up with Baha'i beliefs. That works fine for Baha'is, because they believe their religion has the real truth about these things. But, for people in those other religions, Baha'is come off as knowing those religions better than the people that believe and live by those religions. An example of this is how many Christians believe Satan is real and that Jesus rose from the dead. Baha'is tell them "no". There is no Satan and Jesus is dead. Only his spirit is alive and rose. Even though the gospel stories have Jesus walking, talking, eating and being touched by his disciples and saying "touch me and see that I am not a ghost but have flesh and bone.

Now about meditation... When a Baha'is says that we shouldn't bother with the older religions, that their teachings and, in essence, their usefulness has ended, that is when I asked about the many things that the Dharmic religions bring that the Abrahamic religions don't have. I don't know for sure, but it might go so far as to be offering a path to where a person reaches a stage of enlightenment to where they are "one" with the Divine. In the Baha'i Faith we have ordinary people that can only know about God through what Baha'u'llah has said. And, it's very apparent that Baha'is don't believe most all beliefs and practices of any of the other religions. Baha'is usually explain this by saying, again, the "original" message was lost and all we have is the misinterpretations and additions made to the religious beliefs by man.

 

[CG Didymus]

Baha'u'llah, if you consider carefully what what He said in the Book of Certitude, He showed the way to how to understand all prophecies, and also the spiritual prerequisites of what we need to find the truth.

I believe that Bill Sears tried too hard to find a literal fulfillment, when what we need is symbolic fulfillment. You have your own opinion of what Abdu'l-Baha said about a couple of chapters in Revelations and I have mine.

One typical question I've asked other Baha'is is about the "Lamb" and the "Lamb that was Slain". For me, I agree with Christians, it is Jesus. But, it's their book, written by one of their own. Now Baha'is come and give some interpretations of some of the chapter in Revelation... but not all. I don't know if Muhammad made any interpretations of it, but it would be nice. If not, then all we have is the Baha'is saying that Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah are the Three Woes. But there are other Woes in the book. What about them? And, probably, the Greek word can mean something a little than Woe anyway. So maybe that's worth checking out. But then, the Two Witnesses is also supposed to be Muhammad and Ali.

The beasts and the dragon are made to be the Umayyads and the Abbasids. With the 666 being the year the Umayyads came to power. None of it is all that great as to fit within the context of what it says in Revelation. But, it's close enough, and explains enough for Baha'is to be satisfied? Really? No questions? No doubts? No, Baha'is are left to try and defend those interpretations.

 

[CG Didymus]

You seem to depend on the stories people say, and don't see them for yourself, with your own eyes. Am I misunderstanding? I'm guessing at the times that Baha'is told you these things, you had little knowledge of other religions, and were trusting too much of what the Baha'is said, and didn't investigate and ponder on it yourself.

Yes, but the first people I trusted to be telling me the truth about what the Bible said was Baha'is. With the Christians, I did read the NT and much of the Jewish Bible for the first time. By just reading the NT, it is clearly "proving" that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah and that he rose from the dead and conquered Satan. By just reading the Jewish Bible, that might not necessarily be true. By just reading the Baha'i writings, Baha'u'llah is clearly the promised one of all religions. So how is anyone ever going to know enough about every religion to ever know for sure? Like how is Baha'u'llah the Kalki avatar from Hinduism or the Maitreya from Buddhism?

I've seen the prophecies and the supposed ways that they were "fulfilled" by Baha'u'llah. Again, good enough for Baha'is, but not so convincing for many Hindus and Buddhists. If I point out problems and ask questions, the Baha'is still seem to have the attitude of "trust us". And why do they believe they can be trusted? Because they have read, investigated, the Baha'i writings and have found them to be true? Which means, anything the other religions say, if it contradicts the Baha'i writings, must be false... but actually they don't like saying "false" they say, instead, that those things have been misinterpreted.

 

[Truthseeker]

One typical question I've asked other Baha'is is about the "Lamb" and the "Lamb that was Slain". For me, I agree with Christians, it is Jesus. But, it's their book, written by one of their own. Now Baha'is come and give some interpretations of some of the chapter in Revelation... but not all. I don't know if Muhammad made any interpretations of it, but it would be nice. If not, then all we have is the Baha'is saying that Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah are the Three Woes. But there are other Woes in the book. What about them? And, probably, the Greek word can mean something a little than Woe anyway. So maybe that's worth checking out. But then, the Two Witnesses is also supposed to be Muhammad and Ali.

The beasts and the dragon are made to be the Umayyads and the Abbasids. With the 666 being the year the Umayyads came to power. None of it is all that great as to fit within the context of what it says in Revelation. But, it's close enough, and explains enough for Baha'is to be satisfied? Really? No questions? No doubts? No, Baha'is are left to try and defend those interpretations.

There's not supposed to be no doubts about these interpretations for non-Baha'is. It's a matter of faith for us as well as being a good interpretation as far as I'm concerned. It also appears Abdu'l-Baha cited these scriptures from Revelation on the fly, without looking at the Bible. It was a oral talk that Abdu'l-Baha later reviewed for accuracy.

 

[Truthseeker]

Yes, but the first people I trusted to be telling me the truth about what the Bible said was Baha'is. With the Christians, I did read the NT and much of the Jewish Bible for the first time. By just reading the NT, it is clearly "proving" that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah and that he rose from the dead and conquered Satan. By just reading the Jewish Bible, that might not necessarily be true. By just reading the Baha'i writings, Baha'u'llah is clearly the promised one of all religions. So how is anyone ever going to know enough about every religion to ever know for sure? Like how is Baha'u'llah the Kalki avatar from Hinduism or the Maitreya from Buddhism?

I've seen the prophecies and the supposed ways that they were "fulfilled" by Baha'u'llah. Again, good enough for Baha'is, but not so convincing for many Hindus and Buddhists. If I point out problems and ask questions, the Baha'is still seem to have the attitude of "trust us". And why do they believe they can be trusted? Because they have read, investigated, the Baha'i writings and have found them to be true? Which means, anything the other religions say, if it contradicts the Baha'i writings, must be false... but actually they don't like saying "false" they say, instead, that those things have been misinterpreted.

I'm sorry for your predicament. I don't think I can help you. Prophecies are not that important. What the text of the Bible says about Jesus rising from the dead says to you is. We all have our understandings.

 

[CG Didymus]

I'm sorry for your predicament. I don't think I can help you. Prophecies are not that important. What the text of the Bible says about Jesus rising from the dead says to you is. We all have our understandings.

If a prophecy says such and such is going to happen and it doesn't happen, then was that a real prophecy? Supposedly, Revelation is fulfilled with what is supposed to happen. If the fulfillment is too vague, then what? Then yes, prophecies become more than unimportant. They become meaningless.

The Bible... I don't think it is fair to call the NT "The Bible". So let's talk about the NT. Is it the "Word of God"? Is it the inerrant, infallible "Word of God"? Can we trust what it says is true? If it says Jesus did certain things and said certain things, can we believe those things are true and accurate? I don't see how any Baha'i can say that. For a Baha'is the Jesus story gets to the part where he is killed and buried and the real historically accurate story ends there. He appeared to people? No, Baha'is believe he is dead. Baha'is believe the rest of the story suddenly becomes a fictional story. But what is the Jesus story if he didn't rise from the dead, but, instead, really was dead? What did he do and say that was really all that profound to be world changing?

But the miraculous stories were believed to be true. And his followers did believe he rose from the dead, and they went to their deaths proclaiming that. That beliefs is still changing the lives of those that believe it. Yet, if Baha'is are correct, it's not true.

 

[Muffled]

Thank you but I believe nothing would exist if God did not create it.

I don't believe we have any way of knowing that but we do know that nothing existed before God created everything.

 

[Muffled]

The Book of Mormon is not a scripture.
What are the contradictions between the Bible and the Qur'an?

I don't believe there are any contradictions between the Bible and Qu'ran and although the Book of Mormon is fiction it tends to follow the Bible pretty closely with only one or two contradictions.

 

[Muffled]

So I guess you think you know more than all the online dictionaries?
I make no claims. Baha'u'llah made the claims and provided evidence to back up His claims.
I believe He was a Messenger of God because of the evidence.
I do not claim that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God because I cannot prove it to anyone except myself.

I believe I have to wonder why if something has no proof , you continue to believe it anyway. I don't know maybe it is just comforting to think the moon is made of green cheese. For me it does not seem like a useless thing that the B man is a religious philosopher. Somewhere along the line he should have had a good idea.

 

[Trailblazer]

I believe I have to wonder why if something has no proof , you continue to believe it anyway.

I said: I do not claim that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God because I cannot prove it to anyone except myself.
So I have proven it to myself, just as everyone would have to do were they to believe in Baha'u'llah

There is proof of the claims Baha'u'llah made, and Baha'u'llah explained exactly what the proof is:

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106

 

[Trailblazer]

I believe I have to wonder why if something has no proof, you continue to believe it anyway.

You believe in Jesus. What proof do you have? You have the Bible, but I cannot understand how that is any better proof than I have for Baha'u'llah. In fact, I do not think the Bible is as good as the proof I have for Baha'u'llah, since the NT cannot even be verified to have been written by the disciples. By contrast, it can be verified tat Baha'u'llah wrote His own scriptures and His life and Mission on earth are verifiable given it is contemporary history.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

The problem with you believing the Messenger is what messenger do you refer to and what was his message?

Is he in the OT? Because that's full of things we now know as untrue. They didn't know when they wrote the bible.

Is it Jesus, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, Paul, Constantine, etc? We now know the NT was created by Constantine and his council. Following on they destroyed other versions that didn't fit their version even those written by disciples.

So for me, the messenger has to prove he is that and if he wants me to believe in him. He has to give bloody good reasons.

I believe the world is heading for a change, a big one that will see Humanity destroyed. The implosion of the natural world is slowly throttling the world of resources. There are 1,000s of messengers of that doom.