Baha'i and Messengers

Trailblazer said:

I never said that so that is a straw man.
I said: Baha'u'llah knew that it was God communicating to Him, but we cannot know that since we were not the ones who were communicated to.

Click to expand...

So those of us who are skeptical are smart and wise.

Why would a believer be motivated to trust a guy's outrageous claim of talking to God?

How Baha'u'llah knew is not something we are privy to since we are not Messengers of God chosen by God.

Click to expand...

Doubt is a good thing. Since these Messengers can't really show us their work, and we have no reason to just take their word for it, then we default to rejecting their claims.

KWED said:

**** me! We've already had this discussion. You are absolutely convinced that god exists and nothing will change your mind. Therefore you are insisting god exists.
Insist: State positively and assertively. (OED)

Click to expand...

No, that won't work. I am not insisting on anything. I believe with certitude but I could not care less what other people believe since it is not my responsibility.

KWED said:

And yet every time you make this claim, you fail to produce either, instead relying of unsupported claims and circular logic.

Click to expand...

No, I have presented evidence dozens of times.

KWED said:

Yes it does. In the same way that me claiming to be a messenger of the invisible unicorns in my garage can be dismissed as "evidence" for those unicorns.

Click to expand...

There is evidence but you are free to dismiss that evidence.

Trailblazer said:

How do you think objective scrutiny would operate to determine if a religious belief is true?

Click to expand...

The skill and discipline of reason and objectivity.

Religious ideas/beliefs are not special, they are just ideas that are open to scrutiny and examination like any other idea. If the idea has not earned enough credibility to judge true.

Since we humans are highly flawed and motivated by passion and emotion, we should demand a high standard of evidence for ideas that are typically implausible and inconsistent to what we observe of reality. If Jim says he talked to God and we should all give him our money, well, I'll bet you'd want some very good evidence before you emptied your bank account, yes?

Audie said:

Believers believe things.
Its not about facts

Click to expand...

But to somewhat cloud the issue, most speak and write as if what they write were facts. They quote their prophet or the scripture as if it was a Math textbook, or a medical paper. 'I can see it as clearly as the mid-day sun' is one of my favorites. Comparing God's existence to the sun's existence, is well, night and day.

Trailblazer said:

No, that won't work. I am not insisting on anything. I believe with certitude but I could not care less what other people believe since it is not my responsibility.

No, I have presented evidence dozens of times.

There is evidence but you are free to dismiss that evidence.

Click to expand...

You present poor and weak evidence. We are not willing to hand over our money to your guru just because you are convinced. We get to use our abilities and assess the same ideas, and find them inadequately evidenced.

You may have emotional reasons to apply low standards of evidence.

Vinayaka said:

But to somewhat cloud the issue, most speak and write as if what they write were facts. They quote their prophet or the scripture as if it was a Math textbook, or a medical paper. 'I can see it as clearly as the mid-day sun' is one of my favorites. Comparing God's existence to the sun's existence, is well, night and day.

Click to expand...

Exactly. When we see this sort of embellishment it indicates the claimant knows they lack actual evidence and go to an extreme measure in debate. I doubt they are consciously aware they do, but is a way they are responding to their own weak claims against hard questions.

When we see theists make more outrageous claims it is an indication that they are feeling very insecure in their position. The act of posting these outrageous claims is more of a self-validating act than debate. They are posting a dubious claim as if it is fact to soothe the anxiety of doubt.

KWED said:

Ok. So everyone who claims that god really has spoken to them must be correct.
Fair enough.

Click to expand...

No, in fact there is many false prophets.

So now can see that one has to pursue the evidence as to determine a True and false Prophet. This is our greatest test.

We can find that guidance in past scriptures and also in the Message of a True Prophet.

Regards Tony

TransmutingSoul said:

No, in fact there is many false prophets.

Click to expand...

Could be as high as 100%.

So now can see that one has to pursue the evidence as to determine a True and false Prophet. This is our greatest test.

Click to expand...

Objective thinkers are best equipped for these tests because they ask the hard questions and reject faith as a means to a conclusion. Trust them.

We can find that guidance in past scriptures and also in the Message of a True Prophet.

Click to expand...

Finding guidance in an old book isn't really proof. There is no connection between what you are claiming here between two sets of ideas and religions.

Audie said:

Believers believe things.
Its not about facts

Click to expand...

but some of us believe things because of the facts.

F1fan said:

This illustrates how tribalism works, and how the community of similar beliefs feeds and reinforces beliefs that are not personally sustainable.

Click to expand...

That is how atheist tribalism works.

ACEofALLaces said:

IMHO, there is no such thing as objective scrutiny, when it comes to "religious beliefs".

Click to expand...

Wow! Thanks for showing up... But of course there is no objective scrutiny when it comes to religious beliefs but you won't find any of these atheists here figuring out what that cannot ever be the case. They will just keep insisting upon it.

ACEofALLaces said:

IMHO, there is no such thing as objective scrutiny, when it comes to "religious beliefs".

Click to expand...

and do you realize that your post was post #1000?
Maybe that is an omen.

KWED said:

And yet every time you make this claim, you fail to produce either, instead relying of unsupported claims and circular logic.

Click to expand...

The source to all proof from God has been given many times.

The fact is that some do not accept it is proof, thus is what God has said is the greatest proof of God.

"Know thou of a certainty that the Unseen can in no wise incarnate His Essence and reveal it unto men. He is, and hath ever been, immensely exalted beyond all that can either be recounted or perceived. From His retreat of glory His voice is ever proclaiming: “Verily, I am God; there is none other God besides Me, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise. I have manifested Myself unto men, and have sent down Him Who is the Day Spring of the signs of My Revelation. Through Him I have caused all creation to testify that there is none other God except Him, the Incomparable, the All-Informed, the All-Wise.” He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person."

So the Person of the Messenger and their life and the Message. They are the proofs.

In the "Words of Wisdom" Baha'u'llah has offered to all humanity these thoughts.


"....The source of error is to disbelieve in the One true God, rely upon aught else but Him, and flee from His Decree.

True loss is for him whose days have been spent in utter ignorance of his self.

The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice, is for man to free himself from idle fancy and imitation, discern with the eye of oneness His glorious handiwork, and look into all things with a searching eye.

Thus have We instructed thee, manifested unto thee Words of Wisdom, that thou mayest be thankful unto the Lord, thy God, and glory therein amidst all peoples."

(Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh)
www.bahai.org/r/150802528

So if that is not seen as proof, then the debate is complete, as there is no other way of determining the Truth of a Messenger.

Their person and their life will fulfil past prophecy, the Message given makes all things new and shapes the direction of humanity, it is the power behind all creation.

That is what it is to have Faith in God, faith founded on any other path is built upon sand, or it is never founded.

Regards Tony

Aupmanyav said:

Congrats for getting a new life, a new eye, a new ear, a new heart and a new mind with which you can gaze through the eye of God. I am satisfied with what I have.

Click to expand...

I can go to most any Christian Church in town and have people tell me the same thing. "I was lost in sin. And Jesus saved me, and gave me a new life in him." And what do most of those Christians believe? That Adam disobeyed God and got cursed. Because of that sin and death entered the world and all people now have a sin nature. They can't save themselves by trying to do good. They can never be good enough for a perfect God. That's why Jesus had to come and die to pay the penalty. No one else did it. No one else can do it. etc, etc...

Any religion, if believed, can make someone new and whole again. I even know some Scientologists that talk that way. Their life was changed by Scientology. If a religion can't change a person for the better, then people go find one that they like that will. That's why I question whether it really is the religion that changes people or because people believe in the religion, any religion, that causes the change. With those Christians, they believe Jesus is God, that Satan is real, and all the rest of the stuff, of which Baha'is say isn't true. Yet, those wrong and even false beliefs, according to Baha'is, changes them and gives them a new life in Jesus. Like you say... "Snake-oil."

F1fan said:

Could be as high as 100%.

Click to expand...

Fortunate for us it is not, or we would not be here. Also fortunately, we have been given free will choice with a rational mind to make such a choice.

Regards Tony

ACEofALLaces said:

IMHO, there is no such thing as objective scrutiny, when it comes to "religious beliefs".

Click to expand...

Not from within

F1fan said:

So those of us who are skeptical are smart and wise.

Why would a believer be motivated to trust a guy's outrageous claim of talking to God?

Click to expand...

I never claimed that Baha'u'llah talked to God, I believe that God spoke to Him through the Holy Spirit.
Why do I believe that claim? Because I looked at the evidence that surrounds the Revelation of Baha'u'llah -- His Person, His Mission, and His Writings.

F1fan said:

Doubt is a good thing. Since these Messengers can't really show us their work, and we have no reason to just take their word for it, then we default to rejecting their claims.

Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with doubt. We should have doubts until we are sure.

How do you think a Messenger could show you their work?
Their work is recorded in the History and the Scriptures.

F1fan said:

The skill and discipline of reason and objectivity.

Click to expand...

Correct, but you assume believers don't have any skill or reason, and that is where you are wrong.

F1fan said:

Objective thinkers are best equipped for these tests because they ask the hard questions and reject faith as a means to a conclusion. Trust them.

Click to expand...

In the Tablet of Wisdom by Baha'u'llah, it is my opinion this is what has been offered about objective truth, "But it is true to say that they object to that which they comprehend".

"....We are loath to enlarge on this subject, inasmuch as the unbelievers have inclined their ears towards Us in order to hear that which might enable them to cavil against God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. And since they are unable to attain to mysteries of knowledge and wisdom from what hath been unraveled by the Source of divine splendor, they rise in protest and burst into clamor. But it is true to say that they object to that which they comprehend, not to the expositions given by the Expounder, nor the truths imparted by the One true God, the Knower of things unseen. Their objections, one and all, turn upon themselves, and I swear by thy life that they are devoid of understanding."

Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh | Bahá’í Reference Library

Regards Tony

TransmutingSoul said:

Is this advice sound?

"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)

Click to expand...

It's not advice. It's an unevidenced claim. Comments like, 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" have no meaning. You don't seem to be able to see that these proclamations are essentially fortune cookie fortunes without the cookie.

Let me offer you some alternate advice, just as opaque and useless: Unity can never be achieved until we all telepathically petition to Raël to focus the yin and yan of his inner eye on our chakras, and astrally project our aura to the ninth cloud of Kolob. This is the only way the world will find unity. Amen.

TransmutingSoul said:

So that to me is the core values found in all God given Faiths, and yes Atheists can also embrace those values.

Click to expand...

The secular humanists are way ahead of you, probably because they aren't weighed down in faith and religion. No religion can equal the values of humanism in terms of promoting love, acceptance, and unity. Do you think you can embrace humanist values? Reason would help you to rid yourself of the contempt you have for atheists. I realize that you think your patronization of and condescension to secular humanists is love, but it's not.

Trailblazer said:

The claim that the God that Baha'is believe in exists has supporting evidence and it is based upon a rational argument.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't, but then it's been established that you don't know what constitutes supporting evidence for an idea.

Trailblazer said:

But there is evidence. You simply saying "Messengers are not evidence for God" does not make it so.

Click to expand...

No, there is no such evidence, just people claiming otherwise. How do I know? First, I would know that alleged messengers of God were that without anybody needing to tell me if their words were clearly words that no man could have written, and their lives lives that no man could have lived without divine intervention.

Second, when asked to present this evidence, they provide nothing that suggests a God exists to an experienced critical thinker. That is what you have done repeatedly.

Trailblazer said:

I never said what He claimed is factual, as God claims can never be factual since they can never be proven, but that does not mean that they are not true.

Click to expand...

This is confirmation that you don't understand what evidence is and does.

Trailblazer said:

I have posted the evidence for Baha'u'llah on this forum over and over again on numerous threads.

Click to expand...

No you haven't. You may think otherwise, but the skilled critical thinker will tell you whether what you presented supports your claims for it. I realize that you don't really know what critical thinking is, what it can do, or recognize it. I also understand that from that perspective, all ideas are just opinions, and none can be called facts. I also know from experience that when you are told this - that there are people who can know things and know that they are correct (and they are not the theists claiming to know a God exists), and know that competing ideas are incorrect, that you bristle and call that arrogance. But it doesn't change the fact that there are people, whether you know it or not, who can know that you have no arguments and that your claims are empty and contradictory.

Trailblazer said:

How do you think objective scrutiny would operate to determine if a religious belief is true?

Click to expand...

We determine what is true empirically by its ability to accurately predict outcomes. If your religion were demonstrably true, it would make unexpected predictions that could be confirmed. This is empiricism 101. Empiricism is the only path to demonstrable truth, and in my opinion, nothing that cannot be demonstrated to be true should be called that.

Here's a belief, albeit not religious. I believe that I live five blocks north and three blocks east of the pier. How do you think we should confirm whether that is true or not? It's pretty obvious to me. No religious belief can pass this test, therefore none should be considered correct.

Audie said:

I dont think vaccine does anything but usually limit the severity.

Click to expand...

Vaccines also diminish transmissibility. Breakthrough infections generally generate a smaller viral load and for fewer days. This is what is hoped for with herd immunity - fewer people infected at any given time shedding less virus for less time, just like with flu during flu season. The unvaccinated undermine that.