• 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!

Prophets, Legitimacy etc.

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet? What are the criteria?

If you religion hasn't any such messengers, what proves its legitimacy to you? That is, why this faith instead of another faith? What makes it more true to you than another one that you choose to follow it?

:)
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
There are different definitions of "prophet". I have not seen a prophet that makes predictions about the future that has not failed. A prophet can also be solely a messenger from God. That sort of prophet may actually exist or may have existed.
 

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
In Hinduism, there aren't really 'prophets'(that I'm aware of), but there are Gurus. However, they only apply to the sect in which their teachings apply. A person chooses/chooses not to take part in any sect based on their own inclinations and reasoning.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet? What are the criteria?

If you religion hasn't any such messengers, what proves its legitimacy to you? That is, why this faith instead of another faith? What makes it more true to you than another one that you choose to follow it?

:)

No prophets. Only experience. That is what proves it's legitimacy to me. Pure unadulterated experience.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet?
I see no Nostradamuses or Zoroasters. What I do see are people who are moved more deeply than normal by suffering, and these are prophets. Its their duty to speak, but speaking about it costs them personally.

What are the criteria?
When a person is willing to endure the personal cost of facing society to call out its evils then is the time to consider and to watch them and to watch the results of what they are calling an evil. Maybe we already know its an evil, and they are reminding us. In that case we should listen whether they are a prophet or not. Anyone can do this and function like a prophet in this respect. Entertainers and public speakers often do.

Lets talk about the strange case of vegetarians. Are they prophets? That remains to be seen. I bring it up because its a good example of a situation in which someone is deeply moved about something yet society isn't sure what to think. Maybe they prophets -- on the topic of vegetarianism.

What about pacifists? Are they prophets? Maybe. I would say yes -- on the topic of pacifism.

Just because someone is sensitive in one area that doesn't mean they are going to be sensitive in all important areas, so a prophet about one topic may be insensitive in general or about other things. In my opinion you can't find a prophet and follow them in all things. It just doesn't happen.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
In Hinduism, there aren't really 'prophets'(that I'm aware of), but there are Gurus. However, they only apply to the sect in which their teachings apply. A person chooses/chooses not to take part in any sect based on their own inclinations and reasoning.
Are Gurus thought to be messengers from the Hindu God or r Gods? If so they could qualify as the not predicting the future sort of prophets.
 

JustGeorge

Not As Much Fun As I Look
Staff member
Premium Member
Are Gurus thought to be messengers from the Hindu God or r Gods? If so they could qualify as the not predicting the future sort of prophets.

Nope. Theyre not messengers from anybody, and they don't predict the future. Honestly, Hinduism as a whole isn't real interested in that kinda stuff. Its more about handling the 'now'.

Gurus are there to help a person find 'moksha', and can be taken or not based on each person's own reasoning. There is no pressure to accept a Guru.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Nope. Theyre not messengers from anybody, and they don't predict the future. Honestly, Hinduism as a whole isn't real interested in that kinda stuff. Its more about handling the 'now'.

Gurus are there to help a person find 'moksha', and can be taken or not based on each person's own reasoning. There is no pressure to accept a Guru.
Thanks for the reply. And to be honest Gurus sound more reliable than prophets.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet? What are the criteria?
That is an excellent question and it just so happens I wrote something up a few months ago when I was discussing the criteria with @Tiberius, so below is what I wrote.

The minimum criteria would be:

1. He had good character as exemplified by his qualities such as love, mercy, kindness, truth, justice, benevolence, gracious, merciful, righteous, forgiving, patient.

2. He believed he had been given a mission by God and did everything he could to see that it was carried out. He was completely successful before his death, and he accomplished everything that he set out to do.

3. He wrote much about God and God's purpose for humans both individually and collectively, or scriptures were written by others who spoke for him. He firmly believed that the work he was doing was for the Cause of God.

4. He had many followers while he was alive, and there are still millions who follow his teachings and gather in groups based on the religion he founded.

5. His followers have grown more numerous in recent times.

I said: "This is a starting point but there are other questions we would want to ask ourselves before we would be able to believe that a man was a true Messenger of God because that is a bold claim so there should be a lot of evidence to support such a claim."

Other criteria he would have to meet is that his religion could not contradict or be in opposition to any of the world religions that are already established and he could not talk down any of those religions and say his religion is the only true religion from God.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Other criteria he would have to meet is that his religion could not contradict or be in opposition to any of the world religions that are already established and he could not talk down any of those religions and say his religion is the only true religion from God.
But this would disqualify Moshe and Torah faith.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
But this would disqualify Moshe and Torah faith.
"Other criteria he would have to meet is that his religion could not contradict or be in opposition to any of the world religions that are already established and he could not talk down any of those religions and say his religion is the only true religion from God."

We are talking about Prophets/Messengers of God. I believe that Moses was a Prophet and a Messenger of God.

Can you explain how Moses contradicted or was in opposition to any of the world religions that were already established or talked down any of those religions and or said that Judaism was the only true religion from God?

I am well aware that Jewish people 'believe' that they have the one true religion of God according to their interpretation of the Torah, but that doesn't mean that Moses ever actually said that. Moreover, Scriptures can be interpreted to mean different things so how can anyone know which interpretation is actually what Moses originally intended?
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
"Other criteria he would have to meet is that his religion could not contradict or be in opposition to any of the world religions that are already established and he could not talk down any of those religions and say his religion is the only true religion from God."

We are talking about Prophets/Messengers of God. I believe that Moses was a Prophet and a Messenger of God.

Can you explain how Moses contradicted or was in opposition to any of the world religions that were already established or talked down any of those religions and or said that Judaism was the only true religion from God?

I am well aware that Jewish people 'believe' that they have the one true religion of God according to their interpretation of the Torah, but that doesn't mean that Moses ever actually said that. Moreover, Scriptures can be interpreted to mean different things so how can anyone know which interpretation is actually what Moses originally intended?
He preached one God, denied other Gods, and that was in direct opposition to 90% of the religions of his day.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
He preached one God, denied other Gods, and that was in direct opposition to 90% of the religions of his day.
Okay thanks, but according to my beliefs those were not true religions unless they taught that there was only one true God, so Moses would have been right to oppose them.

However, we have no idea what Moses would have thought about the religions that came after Judaism.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Okay thanks, but according to my beliefs those were not true religions unless they taught that there was only one true God, so Moses would have been right to oppose them.

However, we have no idea what Moses would have thought about the religions that came after Judaism.
But then you're making a circular argument.

You agree with the prophet because he legitimises the prior religions that you believe predict him, but then say you trust Moshe on the basis that he taught what you consider true religion because your religion says so.

But how do you know what Moshe taught is or was the true religion without someone then backing him up at the time? What's your starting point? He had no known monotheistic forebears.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
But then you're making a circular argument.

You agree with the prophet because he legitimises the prior religions that you believe predict him, but then say you trust Moshe on the basis that he taught what you consider true religion because your religion says so.

But how do you know what Moshe taught is or was the true religion without someone then backing him up at the time? What's your starting point? He had no known monotheistic forebears.
My starting point is the Baha'i Faith. I believe that what Moses taught is a true religion of God because of what the Baha'i Faith teaches, including what Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha wrote about Moses. It is for the same reason that I believe in all the Prophets of the past. The Prophets that Baha'u'llah verifies are written about in The Kitáb-i-Íqán. although there might be other Prophets that were not mentioned. If you enter 'Moses' into the Search box you can read what He wrote about Moses.
 

Tiberius

Well-Known Member
That is an excellent question and it just so happens I wrote something up a few months ago when I was discussing the criteria with @Tiberius, so below is what I wrote.

The minimum criteria would be:

1. He had good character as exemplified by his qualities such as love, mercy, kindness, truth, justice, benevolence, gracious, merciful, righteous, forgiving, patient.

2. He believed he had been given a mission by God and did everything he could to see that it was carried out. He was completely successful before his death, and he accomplished everything that he set out to do.

3. He wrote much about God and God's purpose for humans both individually and collectively, or scriptures were written by others who spoke for him. He firmly believed that the work he was doing was for the Cause of God.

4. He had many followers while he was alive, and there are still millions who follow his teachings and gather in groups based on the religion he founded.

5. His followers have grown more numerous in recent times.

I said: "This is a starting point but there are other questions we would want to ask ourselves before we would be able to believe that a man was a true Messenger of God because that is a bold claim so there should be a lot of evidence to support such a claim."

Other criteria he would have to meet is that his religion could not contradict or be in opposition to any of the world religions that are already established and he could not talk down any of those religions and say his religion is the only true religion from God.

I remember that.

I also remember that you refused to agree that the mystery man I spoke of who met these criteria was a messenger from God...
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet? What are the criteria?

If you religion hasn't any such messengers, what proves its legitimacy to you? That is, why this faith instead of another faith? What makes it more true to you than another one that you choose to follow it?

:)
I'm sure there are many religions that have prophets. As to the Christian faith?


Basically... Deuteronomy 18:21-22, "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."
 
Top