-
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!
Claims vs. Beliefs
- Thread starter Trailblazer
- Start date
It doesn't sound like it from the way you typed it. Or maybe I'm reading it wrong but it sounds to me like you're saying Baha'u'llah tells you how to spot a "real" messenger.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Baha'u'llah told us what the evidence is that supports the claims of any alleged Messenger of God.
You can spot a "real" Messenger by looking at the evidence.
ppp
Well-Known Member
Using one version of a word to describe another version of the same word does not convey information.
.
You have said, "There is absolutely NO WAY to ever know anything about God without Messengers of God."
That statement meets the definition that you provided for the word claim
Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
So you need to believe Baha'u'llah before you can learn how to believe Baha'u'llah is a true messenger.
I'm ruling out any that married young teenage girls.
Wildswanderer
Veteran Member
All the atheist has is belief also.
His belief in what science says now will change soon enough. All anyone has is what they choose to believe.
His belief in what science says now will change soon enough. All anyone has is what they choose to believe.
What happens to theists and agnostics that believe in science?
We have no evidence that there are any actual Messengers. So any writing of people claiming to be a Messenger is something we can doubt.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
"There is absolutely NO WAY to ever know anything about God without Messengers of God" is a claim, but I did not make that claim. Baha'u'llah made that claim and I believe His claim.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, I did not say that. I said that we need to investigate a Messenger such as Baha'u'llah before we can come to believe that He is a Messenger of God.
So if both theists and atheists have beliefs, and atheists are wrong because all they have is beliefs, then theists are wrong in their beliefs too.
Oops, no. Educated people (including many theists) accept the results in science because science shows its work.
But most people don't choose to believe in their cultural beliefs. Cultural beliefs are mostly adopted through life experiences, including religions.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Go ahead, but I suggest you find out the reason for that marriage because otherwise you'd be committing the fallacy of jumping to conclusions.
And you endorsing Baha'u'llah's claims in these discussions is you becoming a proxy for that claim.
You aren't talking to yourself in the car. You are on a public forum that discusses religion, and when you express what you believe is true to others that is a claim of truth.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Nobody has to believe in science because science is based upon facts that can be proven.
This is the problem with messengers, interpretation. Throw in translation and it's meaningless waffle.
You mean more like more Mohammad. The canonical Gospels were all written within a century of Christ's life.
I have standards I won't lower for anyone. Child abuse is one of those standards.
Yet he wasn't proclaimed the "Son of God" until the council of Nicaea. So it took 300 years post resurrection to make that connection? Hmmm
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
You should doubt it unless you find evidence that is sufficient for you to believe it.
Otherwise you could be fooled by some false claimant.