Nothing lasts forever in this life

[Trailblazer]

So your claims are true but mine are untrue.
How is that any different to claiming you are right and I am wrong?

I do not make any claims, I only have beliefs.
I believe my beliefs are true, but that is not me saying I am right and you are wrong.

Of course they did. Bahaullah misled you.

No, He did not, because He did not tell me what to believe. I chose my beliefs based upon my own independent investigation.

“Bahá’u’lláh asked no one to accept His statements and His tokens blindly. On the contrary, He put in the very forefront of His teachings emphatic warnings against blind acceptance of authority, and urged all to open their eyes and ears, and use their own judgement, independently and fearlessly, in order to ascertain the truth. He enjoined the fullest investigation and never concealed Himself, offering, as the supreme proofs of His Prophethood, His words and works and their effects in transforming the lives and characters of men.”
Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 8

Independent Investigation of Truth

You believe everything Bahaullah said because he was god's messenger.
You believe he was god's messenger because of what he said.
And you believe what he said because he was god's messenger.
And you believe...
etc...
...

All straw men.
I believe Baha'u'llah was God's Messenger because of the evidence.
I believe everything Baha'u'llah said because I believed He was God's Messenger after I looked at the evidence that establishes that His testimony is the Truth.

“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]

Yes. You are certain because of what he said.

No, I am certain because of what he did.

Indeed. Because you haven't been able to show that what he said is true.

It is not my job to show that to anyone else, only to myself.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you accept that Hindu beliefs might be true.

I accept that some Hindu beliefs are true, but not the belief in reincarnation.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you accept that god may not exist.
But you are 100% certain that god exists.
Seems reasonable.

I did not say that I accept that God may not exist. I said "it is possible that my beliefs are not true."
I don't accept that.

Depends what those beliefs are. As you have admitted, you can't know if your beliefs are true.
I asked: "How can we ever know if our beliefs are true?"

I did not admit that I cannot know if my beliefs are true.

I don't know. What are those implications?

Everything that follows from the belief, including our eternal destination.

 

[Trailblazer]

Wait. So you are saying that all versions of god are true, and all versions of heaven, hell, etc are true.
Basically, whatever a person believes is true?

No, that is not what I was saying. I don't know how you derived that from what I said.
What a person believes does not make their belief true. It is either true or false.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe that God exists.
I believe that Baha'u'llah communicated with that God.
I am 100% certain about these beliefs.

I don't believe that any deity exists. I don't believe that Baha'u'llah, or anyone else communicated with any deity. I don't believe that it is epistemologically possible to be 100% certain about any belief. Indeed, being hundred percent certain is the very definition of being closed minded.

 

[Sheldon]

I said "it is possible that my beliefs are not true."
I don't accept that.

 

[Sheldon]

I said "it is possible that my beliefs are not true."

I did not admit that I cannot know if my beliefs are true.

 

[Sheldon]

I do not make any claims, I only have beliefs.

That's a claim.

I believe my beliefs are true,

That's another claim.

 

[CG Didymus]

I particularly like the first joke (which could be told about others who believe they're the only ones who will get to heaven, such as many Moslems).

But why would a Baha'i joke use a Christian type of heaven? Why would Hindus and Buddhists be in some mansion in a Christian heaven? Those souls that believe in reincarnation would be waiting to be sent back to Earth and enter a different body.

Then the Baha'i afterlife has people that developed their spiritual side more than others would be closer to God. But I think they have everyone continuing to progress. Which, I suppose, even the worst of us?

 

[CG Didymus]

As there is nothing specific about Joseph Smith in the teachings, the Guardian has no statement to make on his position or about the accuracy of any statement in the Book of Mormon regarding American history or its peoples. This is a matter for historians to pass upon.
(Shoghi Effendi, High Endeavours - Messages to Alaska, p. 71)

The reference to Joseph as a seer by Shoghi Effendi is a pilgrim note, that is, a recollection of something he said, and those we consider unreliable.

I have read some of the Book of Mormon, and have come to a personal conclusion that the story behind it is highly unlikely to have occured, and the story at the end where Jesus comes floating down saying the same words as in the Gospels almost word for word as straining credibility.

However, the Mormons are taught good morals in a number of areas, and their scripture certainly gives them motivation to follow those morals.

And that's the interesting part to me. Because I do feel it was a fabricated story... Yet, it works. It does make the people that apply the teachings to their lives better. It makes me wonder especially about the NT. Angels appearing, a wandering star and the virgin birth, God's voice from heaven and on and on. Too fantastic to be real, but back 2000 years ago, maybe it wasn't so fantastic and unbelievable. All religions had their amazing miracles and Gods coming to Earth and making God/men.

So, same thing, does the story actually have to be true to get people believe and follow the teachings? Unfortunately, I think it is told as true and then written down as if true, so it becomes part of the religion to be believed as true. As you probably know, I think the Bible and the NT were just myths and legends about a God that is always watching and will reward the people that obey him and follow the teachings of his prophet. The Ahmadiyya are even more interesting to me than the Mormons, because their leader claimed to be the Mahdi and people believed him.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think that they believe in the same Creator God as I do.
There is a HUGE difference between somebody who denies the existence of God, and a believer. They reject Scripture, claiming that it has no Divine origin.

It just surprised me, because that is a very Baha'i-like attitude... to downplay the differences and find the commonalities. I'm glad you think that way too. For me, I'm fine with Atheists. I can understand why they don't believe in the God that some religious people say they believe in.

 

[CG Didymus]

So you accept that Hindu beliefs might be true.

Unbelievable. Baha'is tell people in other religions that Baha'is don't believe certain things in those other religions. Doesn't that make those things, from the Baha'is pov, untrue? But I guess not. It must have something to do with a belief is not a claim, therefore to not belief something isn't the same as saying it isn't true?

 

[CG Didymus]

I don't know. What are those implications?

And what if Evangelical Christianity is true? Big implications there, even for Baha'is. But are they worried? No, because they don't believe it is true. So, what is the implication for those that doubt Baha'u'llah? Or... are we doing what all pre-Baha'is should do... investigate the truth, use science to make sure that some religion that some people claim is true, really is true, and not just a bunch of unprovable, superstitious beliefs. Oh yeah, it does have some unprovable beliefs. Are they just superstitions? An almighty, unknowable, invisible spirit-being? And a half divine, half human that has existed for all of eternity that was sent to Earth to teach us about this unknowable spirit-being? Does believing in them sound a little superstitious or totally rational?

 

[CG Didymus]

So it seems that Bahaullah was not aware of Mormonism.

And maybe not aware of, or he didn't care, about Hinduism and Buddhism. Yet, he was supposed to be the return of Krishna, as Kalki, and Buddha, as the Maitreya. You'd think he might have mentioned that. But, as far as I know, I don't think he did.

 

[CG Didymus]

But if we could prove it with any shadow of doubt that God exists. Then it would not be a belief. It would be science. And religion is not science based.

Here... read this...

For Baha’is, both science and religion together constitute one great truth. In clear and uncompromising terms, the Baha’i writings exalt the position of scientific endeavor and discovery:

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible… – Abdu’l-Baha, Baha’i World Faith, p. 239.​

 

[Truthseeker]

So it seems that Bahaullah was not aware of Mormonism.

It means he said nothing about Mormonism to be precise. After all, He lived in a Moslem country, and almost all His Tablets addressed to Muslims, Babis and Baha'is. The scope where what it was known what He would have said was limited at that time. There were no Western Baha'is at that time.

 

[CG Didymus]

It means he said nothing about Mormonism to be precise. After all, He lived in a Moslem country, and almost all His Tablets addressed to Muslims, Babis and Baha'is. The scope where what it was known what He would have said was limited at that time. There were no Western Baha'is at that time.

Yet, he fulfilled all the prophecies of what the Jewish Messiah was supposed to do... What Jesus was supposed to do when he returned... What Krishna and Buddha were supposed to do... And what Zoroaster was supposed to do? Was addressing the Muslims was what was prophesied for them all to do? I know Baha'is tie in the Messiah and Christ a little bit, but I'd be surprised if Kalki and the Maitreya were prophesied to be born in Persia and to get exiled to Palestine. So, when were the first statements about Baha'u'llah being the return of Krishna and Buddha made and by whom?

 

[Trailblazer]

But why would a Baha'i joke use a Christian type of heaven?

It was not a Christian type of heaven because if it was a Christian type there would not be all those different rooms for all the different religious believers. There would be only one room, the room that has Christians in it.

Why would Hindus and Buddhists be in some mansion in a Christian heaven? Those souls that believe in reincarnation would be waiting to be sent back to Earth and enter a different body.

Who knows? The Hindus and Buddhist might be in their rooms waiting for God to send them back to Earth.

Then the Baha'i afterlife has people that developed their spiritual side more than others would be closer to God. But I think they have everyone continuing to progress. Which, I suppose, even the worst of us?

That's true. In the Baha'i afterlife everyone continues to progress, there is no retrogression.

 

[YoursTrue]

Here... read this...

For Baha’is, both science and religion together constitute one great truth. In clear and uncompromising terms, the Baha’i writings exalt the position of scientific endeavor and discovery:

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible… – Abdu’l-Baha, Baha’i World Faith, p. 239.​

Oh? That's interesting. If a question be found contrary to reason -- faith and belief in it are impossible. So then -- while I and others believe in God and have found, upon examination, Darwinian outline of evolution of life to be contrary to reason, for others belief in God is contrary to reason, and for others belief in evolution by natural selection is contrary to reason based on scientific offerings and discovery, and for still others, the two beliefs, (God and evolution) contrary or not, can be meshed. Pick and choose I suppose.