Jesus' Four Failed Prophecies About Him Returning In The Lifetimes Of His Apostles

[Trailblazer]

Sorry, Truthseeker. Looking back I can see that you 'said it first'.

The hundred million dollar difference between atheists and fundamentalist Christians is that the former would believe the truth if they could find it and the latter are not open to believing anything except what they already believe.

Actually that is the difference between atheists and all Christians. Atheists don't believe they know it all but Christians believe they know everything.

 

[samtonga43]

Below is the proof that the Christian Trinity belief (that God is three Persons in One) is illogical.

Question.—What is the meaning of the Trinity, of the Three Persons in One?

Answer.—The Divine Reality, which is purified and sanctified from the understanding of human beings and which can never be imagined by the people of wisdom and of intelligence, is exempt from all conception. That Lordly Reality admits of no division; for division and multiplicity are properties of creatures which are contingent existences, and not accidents which happen to the self-existent.

The Divine Reality is sanctified from singleness, then how much more from plurality. The descent of that Lordly Reality into conditions and degrees would be equivalent to imperfection and contrary to perfection, and is, therefore, absolutely impossible. It perpetually has been, and is, in the exaltation of holiness and sanctity. All that is mentioned of the Manifestations and Dawning-places of God signifies the divine reflection, and not a descent into the conditions of existence. 1

God is pure perfection, and creatures are but imperfections. For God to descend into the conditions of existence would be the greatest of imperfections. Some Answered Questions, pp. 113

There is a Trinity belief that is logical and you can read about it here: 27: THE TRINITY

To summarize that chapter:

God is One, not divided into parts.

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God, an emanation from God. God is like the sun and the Holy Spirit is like the rays of the sun. God remains in His own high place, and does not ever descend to earth.

The Holy Spirit is the Bounty of God which became visible and evident in Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ was like a clear mirror, and God became visible in the mirror, but God did not descend into the mirror. This is why Christ said, “The Father is in the Son,” meaning that the God was visible and manifest in this mirror.

My post was addressed to SZ. Are we to assume that she/he agrees with the above?

 

[samtonga43]

The hundred million dollar difference between atheists and fundamentalist Christians is that the former would believe the truth if they could find it and the latter are not open to believing anything except what they already believe.

Actually that is the difference between atheists and all Christians. Atheists don't believe they know it all but Christians believe they know everything.

Every time you use this kind of silly generalization you diminish any argument you are attempting to make.

 

[Trailblazer]

My post was addressed to SZ. Are we to assume that she/he agrees with the above?

My post was addressed to you, not to SZ. I do not assume either one of you are going to agree with anything I post, I just post what "I believe." What other people believe or disbelieve is like water off a duck's back for me.

 

[Trailblazer]

Every time you use this kind of silly generalization you diminish any argument you are attempting to make.

1. I am not making an argument, i am only offering an opinion based upon personal experience.
2. It is not a generalization unless you can show me a Christian who is willing to look at anything else besides the Bible or Jesus.... Got any of those Christians anywhere?

 

[samtonga43]

There is absolutely no need for the Bible anymore, we now have the Writings of Baha'u'llah. I would burn every Bible in the world if I could. That is how I feel FWIW.

And there we have it. Fanatical Faith.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You really believe that? It's how some Christians see the Bible, in my view, how they see everything in there as literal and the Old Testament as reliable history, and present it that way to others.

Also, both the fundamental Christian and the atheist are spiritually blind. They share that in common.

Oh my! I wonder if you are spiritually blind when you make such a blatant false accusation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's not a dodge SZ. Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. Your claim is that my beliefs are irrational; however, you at a loss when you are asked to show me how. Sorry, I just can't take you seriously.

It was a dodge. Try again.

Once again, please provide proof.

I see. You do not understand why the Trinity belief is irrational. I doubt if you will let yourself understand. The Trinity is a self contradicting claim. It fails the law of the excluded middle since no one can state what God is using that without contradicting themselves:

Law of excluded middle - Wikipedia

Nor is it a belief that you appear to be able to defend even when you rely on the Bible. Of course you won't attempt to defend your beliefs because you too recognize that they are not rational. You have claimed that they are in the past but have never been able to justify that claim. All you can do is to falsely say that others do not understand epistemology. When you cannot support your claims it is rather apparent that the lack of understanding is likely coming from your side.

 

[Trailblazer]

And there we have it. Fanatical Faith.

There is nothing fanatical about it. I was talking about my feelings. My feelings are entirely separate from my religion and what it actually teaches.

My religion is not fanatical because it teaches that all the major religions are true and that all the Messengers that established those religions were from God. Christianity is the Fanatical Faith because Christians believe that...
Christianity is the only true religion and the Bible is the only true scripture and Jesus is the only way....

You cannot win this one without revamping your entire religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

It was a dodge. Try again.

He is very good at dodging, or should I say trying to dodge.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

The truthful answer would be that they read the Bible literally and without the understanding conveyed by the Holy Spirit.

Then they become infuriated and tell the world that they are atheists "Because I read the Bible."

How on earth would you expect a non-Christian to have understanding conveyed by the holy spirit?????

In any case, it's the HP's job to grant understanding to the person reading it, wouldn't you think? And if the HS is interested in bringing a person to Jesus the HS would grant that understanding, wouldn't you think? And if the HS is interested in bringing a person to Jesus, then whatever understanding the HS grants would be uniform across the board so that everybody read the Bible in the same manner and understood it correctly, wouldn't you think?

But all this lack of coherent action--or any action, period--on the HS's part is clearly explained when you look at it from the point of view that there is no such character as a Holy Spirit. He's a figment of someone's imagination and as such doesn't have the ability to tie a shoelace much less bring a world to an understanding of Jesus. So please forget about expecting any miracles coming about from this imaginary figure. It's just ain't a gonna happen.

 

[Truthseeker]

Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever

Here when He says traditions, He's talking about Islamic traditions, what they call Hadiths. These are reports that are related over generations orally said to be said by Muhammad or the Imams. Sometimes these were undoubtedly made up, so they have no foundation. This is all addressed to an Islamic audience.

You can't use this passage to prove your point. Remember, Baha'u'llah lived an Islamic world, and He was mostly addressing Muslims or Baha'is with a Muslim background.

You yourself have quoted a number of times the Baha'i position on the Bible, you know what it is. It is different from you are saying here.

No, atheists are not spiritually blind, they just have nothing to look at except the Bible because they believe (for whatever reason) that the Bible is the only Holy Book that ever existed.

I don't know what you mean by that. They don't believe in any holy books. They may concentrate on the Bible to prove to Christians and you that God doesn't exist, but they don't believe it's a holy book. They do that because we live in a society dominated by Christians. It's a book they grew up with. They refuse to look at much of Baha'i because they assume it's the same as the rest. They don't want to take the time to do that.

I'm already later than I want to be to take a shower and cuddle with Sara. Good night.

 

[Truthseeker]

The hundred million dollar difference between atheists and fundamentalist Christians is that the former would believe the truth if they could find it and the latter are not open to believing anything except what they already believe.

I don't believe that most atheists are any more open than fundamental Christians. Most people are attached to what they already believe, including many Baha'is. The truth is in front of a lot of atheists and they can't see it. They are not in touch with their true inner selves that Shoghi Effendi talked about in an Email I sent you. Mostly they can only see outer reality. They don't trust inner truths, at least the scientists among them see it that way. So many of scientists are atheists or deists like Einstein, who is a hero from my youth. It is all a part of the divide between science, reason, and religion, which the Christians caused in the first place, of course. The irrationality of current Christians turned a lot of people against religion in the Western countries.

I think you also may be part of this split between reason and religion. I'm not sure. You see everything in reason primarily, though not wholly.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't believe that most atheists are any more open than fundamental Christians. Most people are attached to what they already believe, including many Baha'is. The truth is in front of a lot of atheists and they can't see it.

I agree, but the difference between Baha'is and Christians is that we believe all the major religions are true.
As for the atheists, they just do not believe anything that cannot be objectively proven.

They are not in touch with their true inner selves that Shoghi Effendi talked about in an Email I sent you. Mostly they can only see outer reality. They don't trust inner truths, at least the scientists among them see it that way. So many of scientists are atheists or deists like Einstein, who is a hero from my youth. It is all a part of the divide between science, reason, and religion, which the Christians caused in the first place, of course. The irrationality of current Christians turned a lot of people against religion in the Western countries.

Those are good insights, I fully agree. Atheists do not see inner truths because they completely disregard the Messengers of God who reveal them.

I think you also may be part of this split between reason and religion. I'm not sure. You see everything in reason primarily, though not wholly.

That's true too, I do see a lot through reason, but that is a good thing because that is why I am still a Baha'i in spite of how I sometimes feel about God. There is no way the Baha'i Faith can be refuted because there is just too much evidence for Baha'u'llah being who He claimed to be.

I'll catch your other post tomorrow.

 

[samtonga43]

I agree, but the difference between Bahai's and Christians is that we believe all the major religions are true.

Good! So you believe that Christianity is true. We agree!
(FYI: Baha'is, not Bahai's)

As for the atheists, they just do not believe anything that cannot be objectively proven.

What would an atheist say about this question:--
If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound?

There is no way the Baha'i Faith can be refuted because there is just too much evidence for Baha'u'llah being who He claimed to be.

Evidence? Where?

 

[Trailblazer]

Good! So you believe that Christianity is true. We agree!

Yes and no. We believe that the Bible is true, but we do not believe that everything that Christians believe is true, since we believe that some of the Bible has been misinterpreted and misunderstood by Christians. Moreover, we do not believe in the man-made Christian doctrines that resulted from a misunderstanding of the Bible and we do nit interpret everything in the Bible literally.

The Bahá'í viewpoint proposed by this essay has been established as follows: The Bible is a reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book. However, as a collection of the writings of independent and human authors, it is not necessarily historically accurate. Nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God' in the way the original words of Moses and Jesus could have been. Instead there is an area of continuing interest for Bahá'í scholars, possibly involving the creation of new categories for defining authoritative religious literature.

A Baháí View of the Bible
(Rosebery, Australia: Association for Baha'i Studies Australia, 1996)

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet....

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
(From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice)

What would an atheist say about this question:--
If a tree falls in a forest and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound?

I don't know, you'd have to ask an atheist.

Evidence? Where?

Some time ago when asked for evidence I posted the claims of Baha’u’llah and the evidence that supports the claims of Baha’u’llah on this thread:

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

 

[Trailblazer]

You can't use this passage to prove your point. Remember, Baha'u'llah lived an Islamic world, and He was mostly addressing Muslims or Baha'is with a Muslim background.

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination. Thou dost witness how most of the commentaries and interpretations of the words of God, now current amongst men, are devoid of truth. Their falsity hath, in some cases, been exposed when the intervening veils were rent asunder. They themselves have acknowledged their failure in apprehending the meaning of any of the words of God.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 171-172

I do not think you can assume that Baha’u’llah was referring to Islamic traditions. I tried to find this quote in any other Writings of Baha’u’llah and I could not find it. “The words of God now current amongst men” could refer to any scriptures.

You yourself have quoted a number of times the Baha'i position on the Bible, you know what it is. It is different from you are saying here.

Baha’u’llah was not referring to the Bible; He was referring to “certain traditions of bygone ages” which means religious traditions. “The commentaries and interpretations of the words of God now current amongst men” is not referring to the scriptures; it is referring to interpretations of the scriptures, and He said that they have been “influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination.”

I don't know what you mean by that. They don't believe in any holy books. They may concentrate on the Bible to prove to Christians and you that God doesn't exist, but they don't believe it's a holy book. They do that because we live in a society dominated by Christians. It's a book they grew up with. They refuse to look at much of Baha'i because they assume it's the same as the rest. They don't want to take the time to do that.

No, atheists do not believe in the Bible but that does not mean they don’t talk about it as if they do, and they don’t talk about any other holy books. But you are right in saying that they won’t look at Baha’is because they assume it is just another religion like Christianity, but that is largely influenced by what they see in the Bible, assuming all hily books are just more of the same.

 

[samtonga43]

It was a dodge. Try again.

LOL! I really don't need to try, SZ. You are doing it all for me.

I see. You do not understand why the Trinity belief is irrational.

Oh, I completely understand why YOU think that Trinity is irrational.
I was once an atheist and thought exactly the same. But sometimes Truth with a capital 'T' is irrational. I prefer to use the word supra-rational when speaking of Truths beyond human understanding.

Trinity is a self contradicting claim. It fails the law of the excluded middle since no one can state what God is using that without contradicting themselves

Sorry, not sure what you're trying to say here - can you clarify?

 

[samtonga43]

Yes and no. We believe that the Bible is true, but we do not believe that everything that Christians believe is true, since we believe that some of the Bible has been misinterpreted and misunderstood by Christians. Moreover, we do not believe in the man-made Christian doctrines that resulted from a misunderstanding of the Bible and we do nit interpret everything in the Bible literally.

The Bahá'í viewpoint proposed by this essay has been established as follows: The Bible is a reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book. However, as a collection of the writings of independent and human authors, it is not necessarily historically accurate. Nor can the words of its writers, although inspired, be strictly defined as 'The Word of God' in the way the original words of Moses and Jesus could have been. Instead there is an area of continuing interest for Bahá'í scholars, possibly involving the creation of new categories for defining authoritative religious literature.

A Baháí View of the Bible
(Rosebery, Australia: Association for Baha'i Studies Australia, 1996)

In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet....

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
(From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice)

I don't know, you'd have to ask an atheist.

Some time ago when asked for evidence I posted the claims of Baha’u’llah and the evidence that supports the claims of Baha’u’llah on this thread:

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

Sorry, I see no evidence there.

 

[Trailblazer]

Sorry, I see no evidence there.

No need to be sorry. Very few people see the evidence right now (Matthew 7:13-14)

History repeats itself. Very few people saw the evidence for Jesus in the beginning, but what the first disciples had seen the world realized later.

“When Christ appeared He manifested Himself at Jerusalem. He called men to the Kingdom of God, He invited them to Eternal Life and He told them to acquire human perfections. The Light of Guidance was shed forth by that radiant Star, and He at length gave His life in sacrifice for humanity.

All through His blessed life He suffered oppression and hardship, and in spite of all this humanity was His enemy!

They denied Him, scorned Him, ill-treated Him and cursed Him. He was not treated like a man—and yet in spite of all this He was the embodiment of pity and of supreme goodness and love……..

It was not until many years after His ascension that they knew who He was, and at the time of His ascension He had only a very few disciples; only a comparatively small following believed His precepts and followed His laws. The ignorant said, ‘Who is this individual; He has only a few disciples!’ But those who knew said: ‘He is the Sun who will shine in the East and in the West, He is the Manifestation who shall give life to the world’.

What the first disciples had seen the world realized later.” Paris Talks, pp, 116-117