• 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!

is the Abrahamic God, the real God?

firedragon

Veteran Member
Of all the Abrahamic religions, the scriptures of the Baha'i Faith are closest to the Source, since Baha'u'llah was the only Prophet who penned scriptures in His own hand, so if that is the criteria one is using to decide which Abrahamic religion is the truth, then you can do the math.

However, as you probably know, Baha'is do say we have the only true religion, just because we have the only authentic scriptures.

I think you cherry picked one point for your proselytisation.

Nevertheless, I dont mind looking at the dating of the manuscripts. So, please provide dating evidence. Either carbon 14 adding or/and palaeographic dating. No worries.

Peace.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I think you cherry picked one point for your proselytisation.

Nevertheless, I dont mind looking at the dating of the manuscripts. So, please provide dating evidence. Either carbon 14 adding or/and palaeographic dating. No worries.

Peace.
The List of the Tablets of Baha'u'llah and the dates He wrote the Tablets are in this wikipedia article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_writings_of_Baha'u'llah

There is no need for carbon 14 adding or/and palaeographic dating because the Tablets of Baha'u'llah were written in modern times, ranging from 1852 to 1891 AD. I have never seen an original Tablet, since those are kept in the archives building in Haifa, Israel. Baha'u'llah stamped the Tablets with His Seal, so I imagine that He also dated them. You would have to contact the Universal House of Justice (UHJ) for more information regarding that, since they are in charge of the original Tablets.

The Writings of Baha’u’llah have been authenticated by the Archives office and that process is still underway.

Texts, Sacred, Numbers and Classifications of
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Because all of the the Old Testament god's characteristics are human, proving he was created by a people as they envisioned how they wanted their god to be.

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”--Dawkins

A real God could not possibly possess all these negative characteristics.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
1. Take their respective scriptures, and read them.
2. Find out if the books go back to the source. (Source being the person who is claimed to be the prophet)
3. Find out which book has manuscripts that go to the source or closest to the source (again, the prophet)
4. Understand that these books are supposed to be scripture, thus respect them and analyse them for their internal coherence. Discrepancies would say "no no".
5. Go to the source.

Cheers.
Harry potter and lord of the rings go back to their source and are internally consistent.

I think you have not even bothered if that is the extent of your investigation.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Because all of the the Old Testament god's characteristics are human, proving he was created by a people as they envisioned how they wanted their god to be.

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”--Dawkins

A real God could not possibly possess all these negative characteristics.
As I think I told you on another thread a while back, I cannot imagine why anyone would believe that the anthropomorphic God that was depicted in the Old Testament represents the one true God of Abraham. I would not believe in the Abrahamic God either if I believed that He was the god represented in that book. ;)

So you were correct in saying that all of the the Old Testament god's characteristics are human, proving he was created by a people as they envisioned how they wanted their god to be. Actually, I could not have stated it any better than that. :) Why anyone would want their god to be like that is anyone's best guess. I like the God of the New Testament a helluva lot better, although He too has been anthropmorphized.

I believe there is an Abrahamic God, but that He was misrepresented in the Old Testament, made into a human god. However, that is NOT the God's fault, because He did not write that book.
 

alypius

Active Member
Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Baha'is all have different laws they believe God wants them to follow.

Is there an alternative to this scenario: if the claims of the 4 groups are mutually exclusive, then logically there can only be two options: one of them is true and the others are false, or they are all false?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Is there an alternative to this scenario: if the claims of the 4 groups are mutually exclusive, then logically there can only be two options: one of them is true and the others are false, or they are all false?
The claims of the 'believers' in these religions are mutually exclusive because all of the Abrahamic religions aside from the Baha'i Faith has believers who believe they are the one true religion, the last religion to be revealed and the best religion. However, what people 'believe' is not necessarily what was revealed in their scriptures.

I do not believe that any of these religions are mutually exclusive, they are just different, because what is revealed by God changes over time, according to the requirements of humans in different ages. Referring to the great religions of the world, Baha'u'llah wrote:

“These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 287-288
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
I believe there is an Abrahamic God, but that He was misrepresented in the Old Testament, made into a human god. However, that is NOT the God's fault, because He did not write that book.

The God Jesus spoke of is nothing like the Old Testament God. The God Jesus spoke of is a loving, merciful and compassionate Father. Afaik Muslims also refer to him as "Merciful Father".

"If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!" Matthew 7:11

A question I've always had is that afaik Jews also consider God to be loving, compassionate, and merciful... how do they reconcile that with the God of the Old Testament and his warfare, jealousy, punishments. I see two distinctly different Gods in the Bible.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
A question I've always had is that afaik Jews also consider God to be loving, compassionate, and merciful... how do they reconcile that with the God of the Old Testament and his warfare, jealousy, punishments. I see two distinctly different Gods in the Bible.
I also see two different Gods in the Bible, one in the Old Testament and one in the New Testament, and since the God of Christianity, Islam, and the Baha'i Faith is a loving and merciful God, and God is immutable, that tells me that the Old Testament is not an accurate representation of the one true God. I consider this a serious problem and one reason it is serious is that it is one reason why many people don't believe in God.

The Immutability of God is an attribute that "God is unchanging in his character, will, and covenant promises." God's immutability defines all God's other attributes: God is immutably wise, merciful, good, and gracious. ... An infinite and changing God is inconceivable; indeed, it is a contradiction in definition.

Immutability (theology) - Wikipedia
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
There is no need for carbon 14 adding or/and palaeographic dating because the Tablets of Baha'u'llah were written in modern times, ranging from 1852 to 1891 AD.

Maybe it is all authentic, but that was one of the most nonsensical statements made. Please dont sis. We are all bias I understand, but this level of bias is "not you".

I dont question the authenticity of any of the Bahai writings. I dont know. It was an interesting question. Thats all.

Cheers.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Harry potter and lord of the rings go back to their source and are internally consistent.

I think you have not even bothered if that is the extent of your investigation.

Haha. So tell me, are they scripture?

Now obviously you would retort with "some one might take it as scripture". Many do that for the sake of just arguing.

But that's not the question. ;)
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Haha. So tell me, are they scripture?

Now obviously you would retort with "some one might take it as scripture". Many do that for the sake of just arguing.

But that's not the question. ;)
Nope they are not scripture, they are fiction, just like the stories in the Quran of mythical figures like Adam, Noah etc
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Nope they are not scripture, they are fiction, just like the stories in the Quran of mythical figures like Adam, Noah etc

Nice. So I was addressing "scripture".

1. So who claimed Harry Potter is scripture?
2. What evidence do you have that Adam and Noah were fiction?
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Nice. So I was addressing "scripture".

1. So who claimed Harry Potter is scripture?
2. What evidence do you have that Adam and Noah were fiction?
1. No one, that is a strawman that you raised, not me.

2. In my opinion the pre-existing stories that the Bible and later the Quran copied from, plus the fact that there is no evidence for God going around destroying people as was claimed in the story of Noah, and don't even get me started on why the evidence is against that Moses character having left Egypt with the children of Israel
 
Last edited:

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
But doesn't Islam teach that there is only one true God?
My understanding is that Allah is the only God a muslim should follow.
If we mix in belief from others it is not islam.

But since i can not see Allah, how would i know if there is or isn't other Gods out there :confused:
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
1. No one, that is a strawman that you raised, not me.

Note the first point. So it was your strawman, you did not respond to the whole argument. You responded to an argument I did not make. You cherry picked a bit of a post, which makes it directly misrepresent someone and their statement in context. Thats a strawman, you create it, then you answer it, and you claim others are creating that caricature. Great.

1. Take their respective scriptures, and read them.
2. Find out if the books go back to the source. (Source being the person who is claimed to be the prophet)
3. Find out which book has manuscripts that go to the source or closest to the source (again, the prophet)
4. Understand that these books are supposed to be scripture, thus respect them and analyse them for their internal coherence. Discrepancies would say "no no".
5. Go to the source.

I think looking for every opportunity to make a mockery of another persons scripture maybe your liking, but when you are hellhound with that intent, you may lose the substance of what someone is saying. You should note, this was said to a person who asked a particular question in the OP.

Dont cherry pick and create a caricature to attack. Thats a strawman fallacy.

Peace.
 
Top