God’s Method of delivering messages, is it flawed?

[ppp]

It is an opinion based upon logic, because if an omnipotent God cared if you believe and understand perfectly, an omnipotent God would make sure you believe and understand perfectly.

Caring that condition X occurs is a synonym for wanting condition X to occur. I cannot think of a single time where I wanted something to happen, were I did not also care if it happened. What you are suggesting is that I can both want the apple pie upstairs, and be completely apathetic as to whether or not I get some. I do not see how that could be possible.

Everyone will not use their innate intelligence or take it seriously; that is what free will is all about, the ability to choose.

I think I confused you about what I do not take seriously. Let me clarify. I take the arguments seriously. I take what is presented as evidence seriously. If I didn't I would not bother to evaluate them. What I do not take seriously are the conclusions reached, because what is presented does not rationally justify those conclusions.

 

[Trailblazer]

OK. However, what does one do when the person who claims to be the Messiah doesn't match the bill? Especially if they were warned that many would come that claim to be the Messiah but aren't?

If He did not match the bill then you should not believe He was the Messiah.

At this time, from Christian scriptures and probably agreed by Jewish people, no one fits the bill.

That is not how I see it, as you know. I believe that Baha’u’llah fulfilled the prophecies for the return of Christ, as was demonstrated in this book: Thief in the Night by William Sears

I don't agree here. I find that scripture does fulfill what humanity needs in this age. Is love bygone? Is forgiveness no longer necessary? Is acceptance and adoption by God no longer a desire?

I found scripture helped me in raising children, living life, character building, financial counseling et al.

Could it be that people aren't looking or are predisposed that it is no longer relevant?

I agree that the Bible has the spiritual teachings necessary to know God and live a moral life, raise children, build your character, etc. What I was referring to is what humanity needs as a whole in order to survive and prosper and move onto the next stage of its spiritual evolution.

What do you think Jesus meant in the Lord’s Prayer?

Matthew 6:9-10 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

I believe Jesus was referring to the Kingdom of God on earth, what Baha’is often refer to as the New World Order, but it is much more than political , it is spiritual as well.

Jesus never said He was coming back to this world to build the Kingdom of God on earth. I believe that is a Christian belief that came about by misinterpreting scriptures. Jesus clearly says that His kingdom is not of this world and that His sole purpose was to bear witness to the truth about God.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

I don't really agree with this.

"In total, about half of American adults have changed religious affiliation at least once during their lives. Most people who change their religion leave their childhood faith before age 24, and many of those who change religion do so more than once."

Faith in Flux

half is hardly "a small number".

Okay, fair enough, but I do not think it has always been this way, only in more recent years.

I wouldn't agree here.

An example... there is one true story of Daniel Boone. As time passes, there are many stories that evolve embellishing the truth. The stories may have some truth in it, but it doesn't make the whole of their stories true.

So, IMV, there are religions that have evolved that have some truth in it, but that doesn't translate that their stories are completely true. By the nature of the differences in all religions, it would be impossible to hold that they are progressive and that they are all true.

One cannot believe that reincarnation is true when you believe there is just this life. You cannot believe in multiple gods if you believe in one God. You cannot believe that you will be in the Buddha realm when you believe you will be on this earth.

I agree that all the religions as they are taught and believed today are not reflective of the one true God, but that is because the understanding of religious scriptures has been changed and altered by man over long periods of time, and as such the religions no longer represent what was originally revealed by God. I also believe that many past scriptures have been misinterpreted.

For example, I believe that Buddha taught that there is one God, but what happened since Buddha appeared is that over the passage of time the religion of Buddha became entirely changed and altered. As such, the followers got away from what the Buddha taught and came to believe something entirely different. That explains why most Buddhists do not believe in God.

The following excerpt from a longer chapter explains how religions are changed and altered over time, which is one of the reasons that they need to be renewed in every age.

Question.—To which category do Buddha and Confucius belong?

Answer.—Buddha also established a new religion, and Confucius renewed morals and ancient virtues, but their institutions have been entirely destroyed. The beliefs and rites of the Buddhists and Confucianists have not continued in accordance with their fundamental teachings. The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God, but later the original principles of His doctrines gradually disappeared, and ignorant customs and ceremonials arose and increased until they finally ended in the worship of statues and images.

Now, consider: Christ frequently repeated that the Ten Commandments in the Pentateuch were to be followed, and He insisted that they should be maintained. Among the Ten Commandments is one which says: “Do not worship any picture or image.” 1 At present in some of the Christian churches many pictures and images exist. It is, therefore, clear and evident that the Religion of God does not maintain its original principles among the people, but that it has gradually changed and altered until it has been entirely destroyed and annihilated. Because of this the manifestation is renewed, and a new religion established. But if religions did not change and alter, there would be no need of renewal.

In the beginning the tree was in all its beauty, and full of blossoms and fruits, but at last it became old and entirely fruitless, and it withered and decayed. This is why the True Gardener plants again an incomparable young tree of the same kind and species, which grows and develops day by day, and spreads a wide shadow in the divine garden, and yields admirable fruit. So it is with religions; through the passing of time they change from their original foundation, the truth of the Religion of God entirely departs, and the spirit of it does not stay; heresies appear, and it becomes a body without a soul. That is why it is renewed.

The meaning is that the Buddhists and Confucianists now worship images and statues. They are entirely heedless of the Oneness of God and believe in imaginary gods like the ancient Greeks. But in the beginning it was not so; there were different principles and other ordinances.

Again, consider how much the principles of the religion of Christ have been forgotten, and how many heresies have appeared. For example, Christ forbade revenge and transgression; furthermore, He commanded benevolence and mercy in return for injury and evil. Now reflect: among the Christian nations themselves how many sanguinary wars have taken place, and how much oppression, cruelty, rapacity and bloodthirstiness have occurred! Many of these wars were carried on by command of the Popes. It is then clear and evident that in the passage of time religions become entirely changed and altered. Therefore, they are renewed.
Some Answered Questions, pp. 165-166

When religion is renewed, God has a “new message” that He wants to reveal to humanity since the world we live in changes over time. Every age has its own and problems thus the remedy the world needs in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as what a former age required, nor can it be the same as what a subsequent age will require.

 

[Trailblazer]

Caring that condition X occurs is a synonym for wanting condition X to occur. I cannot think of a single time where I wanted something to happen, were I did not also care if it happened. What you are suggesting is that I can both want the apple pie upstairs, and be completely apathetic as to whether or not I get some. I do not see how that could be possible.

I agree that God both wants and cares that you believe and understand. However, it does not follow that God would use His omnipotent powers to ensure that you understand. It makes no sense to say that God would do that, because God has never done that. That is how we know that God would not do that.

You can "hope" someone will deliver a new car to your door, or you can save up money till you have enough money to buy a new car. Which is the more rational choice?

Or if you really do not care if you have a new car you can just forget about buying a new car and keep driving the old one.

I think I confused you about what I do not take seriously. Let me clarify. I take the arguments seriously. I take what is presented as evidence seriously. If I didn't I would not bother to evaluate them. What I do not take seriously are the conclusions reached, because what is presented does not rationally justify those conclusions.

That is your personal opinion to which you have a right, but other people do not share that opinion; they have a different opinion so they believe that what is presented as evidence rationally justifies their conclusions.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hi Trailblazer, feel like I have read a lot of this before But that is not going to keep me away

Who said I want to keep you away. You are my favorite atheist, remember?

For something to be worth anything in regards to being evidence, one need to be able to demonstrate them. If you can't they are merely claims.

If I tell you that Earth is a square and even write a book about it. Then it is not evidence for anything unless I can demonstrate each of the points, I claim to be evidence for a square Earth.

Baha’u’llah completed a 40 year Mission, which can be read about in books that chronicled the history of the Baha’i Faith. That is not proof that He was a Messenger of God, but I never said it was. But it is proof that He actually did what He wrote about.

That means both what I say and what is written in the book. If I can't do that, then it is simply claims. The only thing you can say is evidence, is that the book is evidence for me making the claim that Earth is a square, it's not evidence for Earth actually being so.

You really get evidence and claims mixed up and what they are evidence for and what they are not. All the writings of Baha'u'llah is evidence for him having written them, not for the content being true and the same goes with his life, his person etc.

If you mean I cannot demonstrate that the writings of Baha'u'llah are proof that He got a Revelation from God, I never made such a claim. Remember what I said on the other thread:

“Allow me to preface this by saying that nobody can prove that a Messenger received communication from God, since nobody can prove that God exists. As I have been saying in this forum for years, all we have is evidence, and evidence is not the same as proof”

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search

 

[rational experiences]

The history male human scientific inventors, the theist, designer and then artificial builder. The Creator inventor of the artificial God, his own control and ideas, by machines.

The machine owns no self volition. Yet his mineral particle mass melt and cooling equates, my machine is like the fission body of the God planet. So pretends so now my machine is like a God. Yet it is just his idol and falsification of a God.

By his theorising and want of controlled energy reactions and changes to natural history in space.

So his teaching was that space was a theme womb and it was Holy, and only space owned the creation. It was a teaching and not a thesis that space a womb brought forward life or creation. Mass is a known historic burning self present form in the body/womb of space. And vacuum spatial cooling and increased gain of more space by consumption of mass...stopped mass from its destruction.

The teaching by males in science quoted, so space was a Holy body and a Mother, for creation.

Not for self personally, but infers it to self. A mother in a false position, being science and MATHS quotes...fakery and artificial lying. Male in science.

Male in science conditions therefore changed the spatial Mother by releasing the God stone seal for nuclear sciences. And it then abominated the space.

Seeing natural day light sacrificed Immaculate spirit was also a Holy status by definition of a male teaching in science. Holy Mother allowed the holy gas spirit to be sacrificed but stopped it from falling out.

Holy story of science and mathematics as a scientists quote.

Therefore when he broke the seal of Earth natural fusion it began to convert, seeing natural owns its own body of mass. Science, the human self learnt his lesson and gave his quoted teachings a thesis about why life gets sacrificed and does not remain holy...not in blood and not in bio cell.

The reasons for the stories.

So if the story or Message get delivered to humanity only after life is attacked, it proves that the Messenger in reality is not special or especial....it was just a needed advice to quote....yes life changes occurred again. As a human I will re preach and re teach that the occult causes against life survival was real...and I will teach and remind everyone of what we already knew.

For you cannot reiterate a previous teaching as a new teaching unless once the new teaching first did not exist. Being first choice to do science. The advice what would be caused did not exist. The thesis quotes...you were innocent of the knowledge of the evil act that you would cause.

How it was taught in the sciences as self human male wisdom, the inventor of the sciences.

Why the human female his life partner and equal was badly harmed historically in male human choices who read scientific maths inferred spatial womb themes...which is not a real Mother, and ignored his female equality as a human in his life. Even though he documented that all life is equal and the man/woman also equal. Which means male/female babies are both equal also.

How he came about conditions of his human medical healer spiritual advice such as to cover the body due to irradiation fall out attacks, was in fact spiritually ideal against life/cell body harm. As a rational human reasoning for teaching it.

Just as today we are told to cover up when swimming due to increased radiation.

After all we are all just humans living the same human life expressing the same wrong life choices having not yet learnt to stop harming our own selves.

 

[Nimos]

That is not proof that He was a Messenger of God, but I never said it was. But it is proof that He actually did what He wrote about.

It actually isn't even proof of that as he could be lying. Not saying he is, but simply that in theory he could. Imagine Kim Jong-un from North Korea wrote a book about his life... would you consider everything he wrote in is as being proof that he actually did whatever it said he did?

The only thing that would give credentials to whatever is written in the book as being true, is if other sources can confirm it.

Now just to make it perfectly clear, I don't say that what Baha'u'llah experienced in his life with going to prison etc. is not true. Simply that when we are talking about what proofs are, that his book alone is not demonstrating that he actually experienced what he claims.

“Allow me to preface this by saying that nobody can prove that a Messenger received communication from God, since nobody can prove that God exists. As I have been saying in this forum for years, all we have is evidence, and evidence is not the same as proof”

Let me try an example.

Imagine you are in a courtroom and you are the judge in a murder case.

A person is being charged with having shot another person.

Person A: "The victim was shot with a pistol and the accused own a gun. This is evidence showing that he is guilty and ought to be convicted for murder."

Now unless Person A can demonstrate that the pistol used to shoot the victim is that of the accused, the evidence is useless, wouldn't you agree?

So when you say that Baha'u'llah is who he is, because of all these evidence you say you have, you still have to demonstrate that this is what they mean.
In regards to the court example, you could demonstrate it, by analyzing the bullet and see, if it was fired from the accused gun. And basically you have to do the same with the "evidence" you present, otherwise they are just claims. Exactly as Person A is simply claiming that the accused is guilty without having demonstrated it.

Does that make sense?

 

[rational experiences]

It is the same as asking, does a human being male as a spiritual self, be physically bodily attacked, harmed by his brother the cult group science self, use and own names, because civilizations status claimed we needed to be named for elite control....claim self the victim and give self the named title Jesus and not just be the man attacked first?

As a reasonable explanation, none of us in reality were named other than by another human, living together as humans!!!!!

So as the man is first as a human what difference does it make if he wants to give his own person a named title to own a teaching quote....I owned the experience as a male and teach all purposes just as a human as I live as a human.

Yet know that all natural bodies and self presence before I exist do exist naturally also not named.

How do I explain any thing of a change unless I use a name and a word and a description which includes my own person?

How is a human wrong for using a name or quoted title, when the descriptions involve a thesis including creation reasoning within the details?

The only reason another human observer would quote to the human, can you identify who you are not in that theme. When the human would quote every condition that pre existed before me is what supports my natural highest life to live and not be lying.

It is only not honest in an interpretative reading.

 

[Trailblazer]

It actually isn't even proof of that as he could be lying. Not saying he is, but simply that in theory he could. Imagine Kim Jong-un from North Korea wrote a book about his life... would you consider everything he wrote in is as being proof that he actually did whatever it said he did?

No, but that is why we have outside sources that wrote about him.
There are people who wrote about Baha’u’llah, people who knew Him.

The only thing that would give credentials to whatever is written in the book as being true, is if other sources can confirm it.

That’s right, as I just said above, before I read what you said.

Now just to make it perfectly clear, I don't say that what Baha'u'llah experienced in his life with going to prison etc. is not true. Simply that when we are talking about what proofs are, that his book alone is not demonstrating that he actually experienced what he claims.

That’s true, and Baha’u’llah does not even write much about His experiences, those are chronicled elsewhere, in the history of the Baha’i Faith.

The two authoritative texts that depict the history are The Dawn-Breakers (Nabíl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahá’í Revelation) and God Passes By (1844-1944).

So when you say that Baha'u'llah is who he is, because of all these evidence you say you have, you still have to demonstrate that this is what they mean.
In regards to the court example, you could demonstrate it, by analyzing the bullet and see, if it was fired from the accused gun. And basically you have to do the same with the "evidence" you present, otherwise they are just claims. Exactly as Person A is simply claiming that the accused is guilty without having demonstrated it.

Does that make sense?

It does make sense, but as I said, a Messenger of God cannot be demonstrated to be a Messenger of God. There is no way it can be proven as you can prove a man murdered his wife using forensic evidence. All we can do is look at all the evidence that indicates He was telling the truth, and then decide if we believe that.

It is a subjective call but we can look at it from a logical point of view. We can ask ourselves why He would do what He did and write what He wrote… What would be His motive? Moreover, how did He do if He was not more than an ordinary man?

I will bring to your attention what is written in God Passes By. This is part of the history:

“So prolific was this period, that during the first two years after His return from His retirement, according to the testimony of Nabíl, who was at that time living in Baghdád, the unrecorded verses that streamed from His lips averaged, in a single day and night, the equivalent of the Qur’án! As to those verses which He either dictated or wrote Himself, their number was no less remarkable than either the wealth of material they contained, or the diversity of subjects to which they referred.........
A certain Muḥammad Karím, a native of Shíráz, who had been a witness to the rapidity and the manner in which the Báb had penned the verses with which He was inspired, has left the following testimony to posterity, after attaining, during those days, the presence of Bahá’u’lláh, and beholding with his own eyes what he himself had considered to be the only proof of the mission of the Promised One: “I bear witness that the verses revealed by Bahá’u’lláh were superior, in the rapidity with which they were penned, in the ease with which they flowed, in their lucidity, their profundity and sweetness to those which I, myself saw pour from the pen of the Báb when in His presence. Had Bahá’u’lláh no other claim to greatness, this were sufficient, in the eyes of the world and its people, that He produced such verses as have streamed this day from His pen.” God Passes By. pp. 137-138

 

[Jos]

If He did not match the bill then you should not believe He was the Messiah.

That is not how I see it, as you know. I believe that Baha’u’llah fulfilled the prophecies for the return of Christ, as was demonstrated in this book: Thief in the Night by William Sears

I agree that the Bible has the spiritual teachings necessary to know God and live a moral life, raise children, build your character, etc. What I was referring to is what humanity needs as a whole in order to survive and prosper and move onto the next stage of its spiritual evolution.

What do you think Jesus meant in the Lord’s Prayer?

Matthew 6:9-10 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

I believe Jesus was referring to the Kingdom of God on earth, what Baha’is often refer to as the New World Order, but it is much more than political , it is spiritual as well.

Jesus never said He was coming back to this world to build the Kingdom of God on earth. I believe that is a Christian belief that came about by misinterpreting scriptures. Jesus clearly says that His kingdom is not of this world and that His sole purpose was to bear witness to the truth about God.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Okay, fair enough, but I do not think it has always been this way, only in more recent years.

I agree that all the religions as they are taught and believed today are not reflective of the one true God, but that is because the understanding of religious scriptures has been changed and altered by man over long periods of time, and as such the religions no longer represent what was originally revealed by God. I also believe that many past scriptures have been misinterpreted.

For example, I believe that Buddha taught that there is one God, but what happened since Buddha appeared is that over the passage of time the religion of Buddha became entirely changed and altered. As such, the followers got away from what the Buddha taught and came to believe something entirely different. That explains why most Buddhists do not believe in God.

The following excerpt from a longer chapter explains how religions are changed and altered over time, which is one of the reasons that they need to be renewed in every age.

Question.—To which category do Buddha and Confucius belong?

Answer.—Buddha also established a new religion, and Confucius renewed morals and ancient virtues, but their institutions have been entirely destroyed. The beliefs and rites of the Buddhists and Confucianists have not continued in accordance with their fundamental teachings. The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God, but later the original principles of His doctrines gradually disappeared, and ignorant customs and ceremonials arose and increased until they finally ended in the worship of statues and images.

Now, consider: Christ frequently repeated that the Ten Commandments in the Pentateuch were to be followed, and He insisted that they should be maintained. Among the Ten Commandments is one which says: “Do not worship any picture or image.” 1 At present in some of the Christian churches many pictures and images exist. It is, therefore, clear and evident that the Religion of God does not maintain its original principles among the people, but that it has gradually changed and altered until it has been entirely destroyed and annihilated. Because of this the manifestation is renewed, and a new religion established. But if religions did not change and alter, there would be no need of renewal.

In the beginning the tree was in all its beauty, and full of blossoms and fruits, but at last it became old and entirely fruitless, and it withered and decayed. This is why the True Gardener plants again an incomparable young tree of the same kind and species, which grows and develops day by day, and spreads a wide shadow in the divine garden, and yields admirable fruit. So it is with religions; through the passing of time they change from their original foundation, the truth of the Religion of God entirely departs, and the spirit of it does not stay; heresies appear, and it becomes a body without a soul. That is why it is renewed.

The meaning is that the Buddhists and Confucianists now worship images and statues. They are entirely heedless of the Oneness of God and believe in imaginary gods like the ancient Greeks. But in the beginning it was not so; there were different principles and other ordinances.

Again, consider how much the principles of the religion of Christ have been forgotten, and how many heresies have appeared. For example, Christ forbade revenge and transgression; furthermore, He commanded benevolence and mercy in return for injury and evil. Now reflect: among the Christian nations themselves how many sanguinary wars have taken place, and how much oppression, cruelty, rapacity and bloodthirstiness have occurred! Many of these wars were carried on by command of the Popes. It is then clear and evident that in the passage of time religions become entirely changed and altered. Therefore, they are renewed.
Some Answered Questions, pp. 165-166

When religion is renewed, God has a “new message” that He wants to reveal to humanity since the world we live in changes over time. Every age has its own and problems thus the remedy the world needs in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as what a former age required, nor can it be the same as what a subsequent age will require.

The prophecies are vague and it's very easy for anyone to come up with those predictions.

 

[rational experiences]

The definition of G O D is a spiritual thought aware process of assessing information being a male human owned quote that said due to changes to G O D, the inference of One historically O stone gases, I was notified of my life/male changes, its sacrifices and as a psychic gifted human Medium, meaning aware in conditions of causes I wrote this detail.

Anyone would know who has been life/sacrificed and saved but affected quotes smelling "sweetness" or a perfume, for I had the same experience. And to my life/brain and body it smelt like musk lollies as an explanation.

If a human is physically bodily and mind/brain affected, then it owns a cause of human reasoning, which is historic scientific cause and effect. The only unnatural changed natural living condition.

Before I was irradiated my spiritual experiences was a reasonable healthy life, I had DNA physical problems as a human. I sought meditation and tried to live a balanced emotional human loving response. Knowing it was easy to be or feel angered. And it all changed when I began to be irradiated until it increased into a full attack.

When a human loves their human family as a family member and does not try to preach their personal belief to over ride another's living experience, then rationally when a human begins to be notified of self life living body changes, then they try to explain and also warn their human brothers and sisters of the informed state.

To be changed. Other humans might think it an advice to try to take over human belief, when rationality states it is just a message and a realisation and a teaching advice about changed living conditions of our natural spirit self.

 

[Trailblazer]

The prophecies are vague and it's very easy for anyone to come up with those predictions.

Not all prophecies are vague.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, you are dead on center, it is a huge flaw, but the flaw is in the agnostics or atheists who refuse to accept that God communicates via Messengers. God does not need the belief of people who refuse to look at His Messenger because rejecting the Messenger is akin to rejecting God.

I have not been given a reason to believe what your Messenger has written. All of it is balderdash.

All god expects me to do is devote my entire existence .. that would be the flaw of refusing to consider the prophets of a new religion ..

I have not even found one reason to believe in existence of God / Allah. Hinduism has no prophets. All prophets are sham. Either charlatans or ignorant.

If they were Messengers of the past and they did not even establish a major religion, why would you bother to check them out? There are a mere handful of Messengers who established a major religion and it would not be that difficult to check out their claims, and what you would discover is that they all made valid claims because they were all true Messengers of God.

There are only claims of being messengers but no proof for any one in Abrahamic religions. Don't you understand the difference between a claim and a proof?

.. and if we already determined that there were true Messengers in the past and those Messengers prophesied that another Messenger would come in the future and fulfill their prophecies, ..

No, you have not established that. Prophecies are BS. Future is not predictable.

Are there any Messengers alive in the world today or any who were alive for the last two centuries that claimed/claim to be the return of Christ and the Messiah of all the other religions?

Alive or dead, there have been no messengers from any God / Allah, since even that is a fictitious entity. And claims without proof satisfy only the foolish.

I certainly don't claim to know what the perfect method for a god being to distribute its message to human beings would be. However, all of the evidence indicates that sending human 'messengers' to spread his messenger has turned out to be seriously flawed.

First prove the existence of God / Allah. We know it, even your supposed God / Allah cannot think straight.

The method itself is not flawed as far as revealing God because most people in the world believe in God because of a Messenger of God, so that method has been very successful.

That is the root cause of one of the most irredeemable problem in the world. Many religions, many Gods / Allahs, many prophets / sons / messengers / manifestations / mahdis; and each one trying to be one up on the others.

It does not matter if you call them a Messenger; they are men who founded the religions, so they are Mediators between God and man. The point is that with no Messengers, very few people would believe in God.

No person can be named as the founder of Hinduism, not Rama, not Krishna. Even if you believe that they are historical, they were born in Hinduism. Your point is wrong. Most Hindus do believe in existence of not just one God but hundreds or thousands of Gods and Goddesses. Nobody has ever made a count. Hindus have these false beliefs just like any other people in the world.

 

[Aupmanyav]

No, but that is why we have outside sources that wrote about him.
There are people who wrote about Baha’u’llah, people who knew Him.

How does any one knowing your uneducated 19th Century Iranian preacher proves that there is an Allah and that this Iranian preacher was sent by Allah with a message?

It does make sense, but as I said, a Messenger of God cannot be demonstrated to be a Messenger of God. There is no way it can be proven as you can prove a man murdered his wife using forensic evidence.

Millions of criminal cases are decided by forensic evidence. What trash I you writing. A messenger of Allah with all his own powers and backed by the all-mighty all-knowing Allah cannot give even an iota of evidence to prove that he is one! What kind of paper Allah and messengers do you have?

We can ask ourselves why He would do what He did and write what He wrote… What would be His motive? Moreover, how did He do if He was not more than an ordinary man?

Why did David Koresh, Jim Jones or Shoko Asahara (Om Shinrikyo) start their groups? Because of their ego, to be important among their people. Bab had started a group. When he was killed, the leadership of the group was open. Though Bab had someone else in mind to lead the group but Bahaollah usurped the leadership. He removed many other people who differed with him from the group including nearly all his family. His son and great grandson lived like Caliphs. Religious leadership is heady till it lasts. Unfortunately, that of Bahaollah did not last beyond his great grandson. Some other families have lorded for 50 generations. There are Ismailies, Daudis in Islam and families of Vallabha (1479–1531) and Swaminarayans in Hinduism. Family of Vallabhacharya could be the longest living religious leadership (I need to check).

 

[Nimos]

That’s right, as I just said above, before I read what you said.

But do you also agree that these are not absolute proofs that it is truth either?

It is a subjective call but we can look at it from a logical point of view. We can ask ourselves why He would do what He did and write what He wrote… What would be His motive? Moreover, how did He do if He was not more than an ordinary man?

How did Joseph Smith do what he did?

For one who had little schooling, Joseph Smith left an unusually extensive literary record. From 1828, when he began work on the Book of Mormon at age twenty-two, to 1844, when he was killed at age thirty-eight, Smith produced thousands of pages of revelations, translations, correspondence, declarations, discourses, journals, and histories. His records will fill approximately thirty volumes when publication is complete.

Though he was intelligent and strong willed, no ordinary talent can account for his success. His rise as church leader, city builder, and theologian rested on what he believed was a gift of revelation, by which he meant direct communication from God in the form of visions into heaven, heavenly visitors, or more commonly the words of God coming through direct inspiration.

The revelations derived their credibility partly from the prophetic traditions of the Bible. Joseph Smith moved into a role well known to Christians. He was another Moses or Paul. To most Christians, the Bible stood above all other books precisely because it was the word of God to prophets. Now, the Mormons claimed, God spoke again.
One early convert to the church approached the preaching of Mormon missionaries skeptically but then reasoned:
"I found, on searching the Scriptures, that from the commencement of time, through every age, God continued to send prophets to the people, and always when God had a message for the people, he chose a special messenger to send it by, and it was always headed with a “thus saith the Lord.” . . . If he supplied every other age and people with prophets and special messengers, why not this?"

They are one reason for Yale literary critic Harold Bloom’s comment that Smith was “an authentic religious genius” who “surpassed all Americans, before or since, in the possession and expression of what could be called the religion-making imagination.” Latter-day Saints, of course, consider the translations to have come from God.

Origins
The origins of the translations are not easily identified to everyone’s satisfaction. Smith had little education and no history of literary experimentation. Indeed, nothing in his background prepared him either to translate or to lead a church. He brought neither wealth, social position, nor education to his work.

Do you think that Joseph Smith were a messenger as well and if not, why?

 

[Jos]

Not all prophecies are vague.

Which ones aren't? Can you please show me?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

That is true. The messages are not flawed.

It is the humans who do not get the messages that are flawed.

Prove it. And on this score, I am 99.9% that YOU HAVE NOTHING. You should just realize this and stop until you do have the goods.

I'm simply not going to follow any of your prescriptions... I read what you write, and your words ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH. There are no consequences to my life to not heeding you, or these "messengers", etc. There are no consequences to my life to not listening to "god" or anyone's ideas of "god." I don't need to heed any of it, and I can go on about my business without a single issue or detriment. And that's really ALL YOU CAN THREATEN - is that something bad will happen, or imply that I am somehow being intellectually remiss. That's all you have... and it is NOTHING. I am of the opinion that to anyone even slightly self-secure, your words should not even be considered after they are read. People with claims like yours are a dime a half-dozen-billion - and not one of them should be able to compel anyone to believe with the absolute crap they/you are peddling.

 

[Trailblazer]

All prophets are sham. Either charlatans or ignorant.

If that is just a personal opinion, fine, but if you are asserting that you have the burden of proof.

There are only claims of being messengers but no proof for any one in Abrahamic religions.

Don't you understand the difference between a claim and a proof?

Of course. that is why I said "but no proof."

Most Hindus do believe in existence of not just one God but hundreds or thousands of Gods and Goddesses. Nobody has ever made a count. Hindus have these false beliefs just like any other people in the world.

To me it is absurd that there would be more than one God but that is just my personal opinion.
Why would we need more than one God?

Besides, there is more evidence for the One True God than there is for hundreds or thousands of Gods and Goddesses.

 

[Nova2216]

Or simply there is no divine transformation of adherents to begin with, which would indicate the lack of a communitive god.

One of us is wrong.

 

[Trailblazer]

How does any one knowing your uneducated 19th Century Iranian preacher proves that there is an Allah and that this Iranian preacher was sent by Allah with a message?

I never said it can be known as a fact. It can only be believed, but I also know it because I have faith and inner certitude.

Millions of criminal cases are decided by forensic evidence. What trash I you writing. A messenger of Allah with all his own powers and backed by the all-mighty all-knowing Allah cannot give even an iota of evidence to prove that he is one! What kind of paper Allah and messengers do you have?

God could prove that He exists IF He wanted to. Baha'u'llah wrote that.

“He Who is the Day Spring of Truth is, no doubt, fully capable of rescuing from such remoteness wayward souls and of causing them to draw nigh unto His court and attain His Presence. “If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people.” His purpose, however, is to enable the pure in spirit and the detached in heart to ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean, that thereby they who seek the Beauty of the All-Glorious may be distinguished and separated from the wayward and perverse. Thus hath it been ordained by the all-glorious and resplendent Pen…”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 71

In the context of the passage above, If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people it means that God could have made all people believers, but IF God has pleased, implies that God did not want to make all people into believers, verified by the fact that not all men are believers. The passage goes on to say why God didn’t want to make us believers... In short, God wants us to do our own homework and become believers by our own efforts (by virtue of their own innate powers).

According to this passage, God wants everyone to search for Him and determine if He exists by using their own innate intelligence and using their free will to make the decision to believe. God wants those who are sincere and truly search for Him to believe in Him. God wants to distinguish those people from the others who are not sincere, those who are unwilling to put forth any effort.

Interestingly, this correlates with one of my favorite Bible verses:

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

I think that verse means is that we need faith that is possible to find God if we earnestly seek Him. It does not mean that we should believe that God exists on faith alone and it does not mean that we must believe God exists before we find the evidence that we find by seeking Him.

Though Bab had someone else in mind to lead the group but Bahaollah usurped the leadership. He removed many other people who differed with him from the group including nearly all his family. His son and great grandson lived like Caliphs.

All of that is false, but I am not going to waste my time explaining what is actually true, because you would not believe it anyway.

 

[MNoBody]

If a perfect and omnipotent god wanted me to believe and understand his message perfectly, then he could deliver it in a way that I believe and understand perfectly. No matter how profoundly flawed or obstinate I might be.

Either he does not want me to believe and understand perfectly, or he is not a perfect and omnipotent god.

similar vein of thought occurs to me, the idea of which, implies much.