Loved ones in hell - take 2.

[cataway]

We are called Baha'is because we are followers of Baha'u'llah just as Christians are called Christians because they follow Christ. However, in order to be a Baha'i we are required to believe in Christ, so it is a given that every Baha'i believes in Christ.

I am not sure what you are asking but Baha'is do not put Baha'u'llah on a pedestal and we do not worship Him, we worship only God. However, Christians put Jesus on a pedestal and worship Him as if He was God, even though Jesus said not to do so.

Mark 10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

Matthew 4:10 Jesus said to him, 'Away from me, Satan! For it is written: "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only."

not put Baha'u'llah on a pedestal yet there is shrine to the man.
its true there are so-called Christians that do worship Jesus. some that dance around with snakes'. they are all ignorant of who the true God is. you can tell them but piff ,you may as well try herding cats. still ,,hey have to be told.

 

[Tiberius]

“any reliable prophecy must meet five criteria”

I don’t care what you consider reliable because you cannot set the standards for how God communicates to prophets who write prophecies. Many years ago, I made a decision that I would no longer be led around by the nose by atheists who think they can set standards for God. Nothing could be more illogical given God is All-Knowing and infallible and you are not All-Knowing, you are just a fallible human being. Why don’t you send God a note and tell Him He did not meet your criteria for reliable prophecies? Do you know why they do not meet your criteria? Because God does not want them to, and God is All-Powerful so you have nothing to say in the matter.

My point was not to show how God must communicate with us, it was to show how WE can make sure that the prophecy is saying what we think it says. You seem to be getting very upset.

No they don’t fail just because I cannot list hundreds of prophecies in a post on a forum. Apparently you have a serious problem with logical reasoning. Numerous prophecies about the same thing still exist even if I won’t/can’t list them because (a) it is not my responsibility to do that and (b) I could never list them all in a post.

It certainly is your responsibility if you want to show that the prophecies pass muster.

Here let me help you with your logic. If I say that I have a new car but I can’t bring it over to show you because I don’t have time right now, that does not mean I do not have a new car. The car still exists even if I cannot show it to you. Likewise, the prophecies still exist even though I cannot post them all on a public forum.

Well, a new car is a pretty bog standard thing, while a prophecy is rather unusual. Let's say you claim you have a brand new Lamborghini in your garage. However, your financial situation seems poor, you refuse to bring it over to show me, you never let me into your garage so I can see it, and none of your neighbours say they have seen it.

In such a case, why should I believe you have a new Lamborghini?

You can go and look at them for yourself.
The prophecies and how they were fulfilled by Baha’u’llah are listed in this book: William Sears, Thief in the Night

I'll see if I can find time later, but at the moment I am about to head to work.

Who cares if prophecies don’t meet your criteria? Who do you think you are to set standards for how scriptures are to be written?
I cannot even imagine anything more arrogant than that.

Again, I never said that I was setting standards for how the prophecies needed to be written. I am saying what standards I think are required for said prophecies to be viewed as reliable.

Who cares what you wrote? How is that comparable to a prophet of the Old Testament writing prophecies that predict the return of Christ/coming of the Messiah? It is completely irrelevant.

You really do seem to be getting quite upset now.

It's relevant because it shows that a person can take a text that was written before an event, and then going and writing on them after some amazing event to make it seem like the original text described something that had not yet occurred.

I absolutely did. You are either seriously lacking in intelligence or you are playing games.

2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.

The prophecy was written:

The Old Testament is the original Hebrew Bible, the sacred scriptures of the Jewish faith, written at different times between about 1200 and 165 BC. The New Testament books were written by Christians in the first century AD.Jul 12, 2011

Religions - Christianity: The Bible - BBC

The event that fulfilled it:

Bahá'u'lláh arrived in Akka in August 1868, so fulfilling prophecies made by Muhammad, and by Jewish prophets, about the importance of the city. Sep 28, 2009

Religions - Bahai: Bahá'u'lláh - BBC

They may have been written before the event, so they don't fail at point 2. But that doesn't mean they haven't failed at one of the other four points. Given the generalities of the prophecies, I;d say they still fail at Point 5.

I have no burden of proof because I am not trying to prove anything to you. The burden is squarely on your shoulders if you want to know the truth about God and Baha’u’llah. I already know the truth because I already did my homework.

You have the burden of proof because you are making the claim. You make the claim, you must support the claim. If you make it without evidence, I will dismiss it without evidence.

I did not say that you said that. I just said the prophecies did not fail on Point 4 and I explained why.

Doesn't show that they didn't fail on some other point.

Who cares if prophecies don’t meet your criteria? Who do you think you are to set standards for how scriptures are to be written?
I cannot even imagine anything more arrogant than that.

Didn't you already say this? If you are going to repeat yourself, I shall as well. I never said that I was setting standards for how the prophecies needed to be written. I am saying what standards I think are required for said prophecies to be viewed as reliable.

Who cares if prophecies don’t meet your criteria? Who do you think you are to set standards for how scriptures are to be written?
I cannot even imagine anything more arrogant than that.

So are you just going to react with anger every time I point out how a prophecy fails at one of the points? Why do you get so angry and upset?

Yes, Baha’u’llah was the only person who was taken from prison and from judgment and also fulfilled the rest of the prophecies.

Please tell me how you have eliminated all other people.

I have made myself perfectly clear so I see no point going over any of these points again. Let me know if you are serious about knowing the truth. Otherwise I am done because I do not have time to play games.

I am serious. Do not think I'm not serious just because I don't agree with you. You have had a go at me repeatedly for being too demanding and saying my criteria for the prophecies are unreasonable, but it is precisely because I am serious that I hold them to such high standards.

Remember: The truth has nothing to fear from a critical examination.

 

[Trailblazer]

not put Baha'u'llah on a pedestal yet there is shrine to the man.
its true there are so-called Christians that do worship Jesus. some that dance around with snakes'. they are all ignorant of who the true God is. you can tell them but piff ,you may as well try herding cats. still ,,hey have to be told.

Christians who believe that Jesus is God are worshiping Jesus as God.
Baha'is believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, not God incarnate.

That is true but a shrine is just a physical structure although it serves a purpose for Baha'is..

The Shrine of Baháʼu'lláh, located in Bahjí near Acre, Israel, is the holiest place for Baháʼís and represents their Qiblih, or direction of prayer. It contains the remains of Baháʼu'lláh and is near the spot where he died in the Mansion of Bahjí.

The Shrine of Baháʼu'lláh is composed of a central area that contains a small, tree-filled garden surrounded by paths covered with Persian rugs.[1][2] A glass roof was constructed by Qulám-ʻAlíy-i-Najjár after the death of Baháʼu'lláh.[3] At the northwest corner of the central area there is a small room containing Baháʼu'lláh's remains.[4][5] The central area has doors to a number of other rooms that have, in recent years, been opened to accommodate the growing number of pilgrims and visitors.[citation needed]

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

 

[Trailblazer]

My point was not to show how God must communicate with us, it was to show how WE can make sure that the prophecy is saying what we think it says. You seem to be getting very upset.

My point is that by setting specific criteria for prophecies you are telling God how He must reveal prophecies to prophets such that they meet your criteria.

It certainly is your responsibility if you want to show that the prophecies pass muster.

But I do not want to show you that that.

Well, a new car is a pretty bog standard thing, while a prophecy is rather unusual. Let's say you claim you have a brand new Lamborghini in your garage. However, your financial situation seems poor, you refuse to bring it over to show me, you never let me into your garage so I can see it, and none of your neighbours say they have seen it.

In such a case, why should I believe you have a new Lamborghini?

I understand your point. You do not have to believe I have a Lamborghini, but that does not mean I do not have one.

I'll see if I can find time later, but at the moment I am about to head to work.

I highly suggest you find time to read that book sometime because it contains what I cannot post on the forum.

Again, I never said that I was setting standards for how the prophecies needed to be written. I am saying what standards I think are required for said prophecies to be viewed as reliable.

That means the same thing because you are saying that if they are going to be reliable they need to be written a certain way so you are setting standards. Do you tell your boss how to do his job?

You really do seem to be getting quite upset now.

It's relevant because it shows that a person can take a text that was written before an event, and then going and writing on them after some amazing event to make it seem like the original text described something that had not yet occurred.

Not upset, just frustrated because I cannot seem to be able to get my point across.
How is that possible? We are talking about the Bible and nobody can add to the Bible so what was written cannot be altered. So whatever happened after the Bible was written could be a fulfillment of a prophecy if it happened as the prophecy described it. For example:

From: William Sears, Thief in the Night

Isaiah prophesied that the Plain of Sharon and the holy mountain, Carmel, would both be centres for the light and presence of the ‘Glory of the Lord’ in the last days. He said:

“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.” (Isaiah 35:1).

“It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God.” (Isaiah 35:2).

“And the ransomed of the LORD shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.” (Isaiah 35:10).

The Baha’i World Centre is on Mount Carmel and that is where the Baha’is go on their pilgrimages... How do you explain that?

They may have been written before the event, so they don't fail at point 2. But that doesn't mean they haven't failed at one of the other four points. Given the generalities of the prophecies, I’d say they still fail at Point 5.

And I’d say they do not have to meet your criteria and it is only your personal opinion that they fail to meet them. I have a different opinion.

You have the burden of proof because you are making the claim. You make the claim, you must support the claim. If you make it without evidence, I will dismiss it without evidence.

I am not making any claim. I am just stating my beliefs and opinions. I can tell you where to find the evidence but it is not my job to present the evidence.

Doesn't show that they didn't fail on some other point.

Only in your opinion, not that it matters whether they meet your criteria.

Didn't you already say this? If you are going to repeat yourself, I shall as well. I never said that I was setting standards for how the prophecies needed to be written. I am saying what standards I think are required for said prophecies to be viewed as reliable.

That means the same thing because you are saying that if they are going to be reliable they need to be written a certain way so you are setting standards. Do you tell your boss how to do his job?

So are you just going to react with anger every time I point out how a prophecy fails at one of the points? Why do you get so angry and upset?

Why do you keep repeating yourself? You are declaring how prophecies should be written so they will measure up to your standards and not fail on your points. This is all about what you want and expect. You are dictating to God how the scriptures should have been written.

Please tell me how you have eliminated all other people.

They eliminated themselves because they did not DO anything that Baha’u’llah DID as was delineated in Thief in the Night by William Sears.

I am serious. Do not think I'm not serious just because I don't agree with you. You have had a go at me repeatedly for being too demanding and saying my criteria for the prophecies are unreasonable, but it is precisely because I am serious that I hold them to such high standards.

But what you apparently do not understand is that you cannot make the Bible prophecies meet your standards. Prophecies were written the way they were and they cannot be changed. If they don’t meet your standards and you find them unacceptable then you do not have to bother with them, just as you would walk off a car lot if there were no cars to buy that met your standards. Do you understand?

Remember: The truth has nothing to fear from a critical examination.

I have no fear because I know who Baha’u’llah was and I have known that for over 50 years, and you cannot even imagine how many people have challenged my beliefs, including many atheists.

 

[cataway]

I have no fear because I know who Baha’u’llah was and I have known that for over 50 years, and you cannot even imagine how many people have challenged my beliefs, including many atheists.

now it sounds of hero worship

 

[Trailblazer]

now it sounds of hero worship

No, not at all. I just believe in Baha'u'llah and the message He brought, I do not worship Him.

 

[Tiberius]

My point is that by setting specific criteria for prophecies you are telling God how He must reveal prophecies to prophets such that they meet your criteria.

I have said several times now that this is not the case. Are you deliberately ignoring what I say?

But I do not want to show you that that.

Then I'm sure you will understand when I decide your claims are nonsense.

I understand your point. You do not have to believe I have a Lamborghini, but that does not mean I do not have one.

I don't think you did understand my point. If all evidence in reality suggests you do not have a Lamborghini, then you have no right to complain when I laugh at your claims that you do. Particularly when you refuse to back up those claims, despite being able to do so easily.

That means the same thing because you are saying that if they are going to be reliable they need to be written a certain way so you are setting standards. Do you tell your boss how to do his job?

No, it is not the same thing.

God can deliver prophecies in any way he wants. But I'm not just going to accept any old vague wishy-washy claim as an accurate prophecy, am I?

Not upset, just frustrated because I cannot seem to be able to get my point across.

Or perhaps I do understand your point quite well, and you are just getting upset that I'm not agreeing with it. You accused me of arrogance, yet you seem to be the one who can't comprehend how someone else could have a different point of view.

How is that possible? We are talking about the Bible and nobody can add to the Bible so what was written cannot be altered. So whatever happened after the Bible was written could be a fulfillment of a prophecy if it happened as the prophecy described it.

You seem unfamiliar with the history of the Bible. Different books were discarded based on what the leaders of the time wanted to include and what they wanted to exclude.

For example:

From: William Sears, Thief in the Night

Isaiah prophesied that the Plain of Sharon and the holy mountain, Carmel, would both be centres for the light and presence of the ‘Glory of the Lord’ in the last days. He said:

“The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose.” (Isaiah 35:1).

“It shall blossom abundantly, and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon, they shall see the glory of the LORD, and the excellency of our God.” (Isaiah 35:2).

“And the ransomed of the LORD shall return, and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.” (Isaiah 35:10).

The Baha’i World Centre is on Mount Carmel and that is where the Baha’is go on their pilgrimages... How do you explain that?

So someone made a prophecy, and later someone came and built this place? Sounds to me like it's very possible that it fails at Point 4: someone built it there intentionally to make the prophecy come true.

And I’d say they do not have to meet your criteria and it is only your personal opinion that they fail to meet them. I have a different opinion.

If they do not meet my criteria, then you put yourself in a position where you can get a prophecy that was put into a text after the event that fulfilled it, and you'd still call it a real prophecy. Or you'd believe that a vague metaphor meant a specific thing, with no evidence to support that conclusions. In other words, you're just giving yourself an excuse to believe whatever you want to believe. Reality doesn't work that way.

I am not making any claim. I am just stating my beliefs and opinions. I can tell you where to find the evidence but it is not my job to present the evidence.

yes it is your job. If you do not think you have to provide evidence to support what you say, then I'll dismiss everything you claim right now in order to save time.

Only in your opinion, not that it matters whether they meet your criteria.

If it doesn't matter, why are you so insistent that they might not have failed on some other criteria?

That means the same thing because you are saying that if they are going to be reliable they need to be written a certain way so you are setting standards. Do you tell your boss how to do his job?

Didn't you already say this in this post?

Why do you keep repeating yourself?

A bit rich for you to complain about me repeating myself when you're guilty of the exact same thing.

You are declaring how prophecies should be written so they will measure up to your standards and not fail on your points. This is all about what you want and expect. You are dictating to God how the scriptures should have been written.

Again, you are wrong. I'm describing the conditions that need to be met for me to conclude that a prophecy is reliable. You keep saying otherwise, which tells me that you are deliberately ignoring what I say.

They eliminated themselves because they did not DO anything that Baha’u’llah DID as was delineated in Thief in the Night by William Sears.

And he checked every single person, did he?

But what you apparently do not understand is that you cannot make the Bible prophecies meet your standards. Prophecies were written the way they were and they cannot be changed. If they don’t meet your standards and you find them unacceptable then you do not have to bother with them, just as you would walk off a car lot if there were no cars to buy that met your standards. Do you understand?

Yes, I understand.

Prophecies, whatever religion they are from, are just vague statements made with no actual foreknowledge, and are simply interpreted later to fit events that happened to support the claim that the religion which made the prophecy is real.

Or they are added to a text AFTER the fact to make it look like the text has a prophecy about the future when it actually didn't, to support the claim that the religion which made the prophecy is real.

Or someone read the prophecy and decided to go and fulfill it to support the claim that the religion which made the prophecy is real.

In any case, the idea of prophecy is complete and total bunk. I made my list to show a way to find out if a prophecy is genuine - it has to pass all the points. But ever since then you have tried to make excuses as to why a prophecy shouldn't have to meet those criteria. Could it be that you know that there are no prophecies that could actually pass them? I suspect so.

I have no fear because I know who Baha’u’llah was and I have known that for over 50 years, and you cannot even imagine how many people have challenged my beliefs, including many atheists.

People of all different beliefs have said that. They were still wrong. Your conviction is not enough to show you are right.

In any case, you say you have no fear, but when it comes time to actually put your beliefs to that critical examination - specifically, the five criteria a prophecy must meet before it can be viewed as reliable - you back away and make excuses why your beliefs don't have to be critically examined.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think you did understand my point. If all evidence in reality suggests you do not have a Lamborghini, then you have no right to complain when I laugh at your claims that you do. Particularly when you refuse to back up those claims, despite being able to do so easily.

If the evidence suggests to you that I do not have a Lamborghini, I am not going to complain.

I could easily back up my claims to have a Lamborghini by inviting you over to see it, but I cannot do that with the prophecies.

God can deliver prophecies in any way he wants. But I'm not just going to accept any old vague wishy-washy claim as an accurate prophecy, am I?

I never said you had to accept any claims of a man to have fulfilled a prophecy. I said you have to accept how the prophecy was written because you cannot change the Bible.

You seem unfamiliar with the history of the Bible. Different books were discarded based on what the leaders of the time wanted to include and what they wanted to exclude.

You are right, I do not know the history of the Bible, but how is that relevant? Everything that ended up being Bible canon was written thousands of years before I believe Christ returned.

So someone made a prophecy, and later someone came and built this place? Sounds to me like it's very possible that it fails at Point 4: someone built it there intentionally to make the prophecy come true.

I predicted you’d say that but it is ludicrous. What you are saying is that all that was built in order to fulfill a few prophecies and fool people into believing that Baha’u’llah was the return of Christ and a Messiah. At some point people have to use logic and reason and ask why anyone would do that. That is so ridiculous that it does not even warrant a reply.

If they do not meet my criteria, then you put yourself in a position where you can get a prophecy that was put into a text after the event that fulfilled it, and you'd still call it a real prophecy.

Of course I would not call that a real prophecy. The event has to come after the prophecy. A prophecy is a foretelling or the prediction of what is to come.

Or you'd believe that a vague metaphor meant a specific thing, with no evidence to support that conclusions. In other words, you're just giving yourself an excuse to believe whatever you want to believe. Reality doesn't work that way.

I do not need prophecies to know who Baha’u’llah was. I never even read one page of the Bible until eight years ago, and I have been a Baha’i for over 50 years. I do not need an excuse to believe what I believe. I know that the prophecies were fulfilled by Baha’u’llah because I know that He was the return of Christ and the Messiah.

yes it is your job. If you do not think you have to provide evidence to support what you say, then I'll dismiss everything you claim right now in order to save time.

Go right ahead. It’ll save both is us some time.

If it doesn't matter, why are you so insistent that they might not have failed on some other criteria?

I do not care if they failed to meet your criteria; that is what you apparently do not understand. It does not matter to me because I do not go by your criteria.

Again, you are wrong. I'm describing the conditions that need to be met for me to conclude that a prophecy is reliable. You keep saying otherwise, which tells me that you are deliberately ignoring what I say.

Fine, but you cannot change the way the prophecies were written so if the prophecies do not meet the conditions that need to be met for me to conclude that a prophecy is reliable you will just have to conclude that they are unreliable for you, but you do not get to determine if other people consider them reliable since other people do not go by your criteria.

“any reliable prophecy must meet five criteria” for YOU to consider it reliable, but it does not have to meet those criteria for OTHER PEOPLE to consider it reliable. Another atheist on this forum had a different set of criteria.

And he checked every single person, did he?

That is so ludicrous it does not even warrant an answer. How and why would he check every single person in the world? Answer the question.

Prophecies, whatever religion they are from, are just vague statements made with no actual foreknowledge, and are simply interpreted later to fit events that happened to support the claim that the religion which made the prophecy is real.

Unless you have evidence to back that up that is simply a bald assertion, a personal opinion, and as such I can disregard it.

But ever since then you have tried to make excuses as to why a prophecy shouldn't have to meet those criteria. Could it be that you know that there are no prophecies that could actually pass them? I suspect so.

I do not care if they failed to meet your criteria; that is what you apparently do not understand. It does not matter to me because I do not go by your criteria.

 

[Tiberius]

If the evidence suggests to you that I do not have a Lamborghini, I am not going to complain.

I could easily back up my claims to have a Lamborghini by inviting you over to see it, but I cannot do that with the prophecies.

Ah, so you are saying there is a criteria by which I can verify your claims!

Funnily enough, there are also criteria by which we can be more confident that a prophecy is correct as well! I've already listed five of them.

1. Numerous prophecies about the same thing
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

I never said you had to accept any claims of a man to have fulfilled a prophecy. I said you have to accept how the prophecy was written because you cannot change the Bible.

You do know that the Bible has changed heaps, right? Books were included and then discarded based on the opinions of church leaders over time, different translations of the Bible interpret passages in different ways to support what church leaders think it should have said, etc...

You are right, I do not know the history of the Bible, but how is that relevant? Everything that ended up being Bible canon was written thousands of years before I believe Christ returned.

It is relevant because it shows your claim - specifically, "whatever happened after the Bible was written could be a fulfillment of a prophecy if it happened as the prophecy described it" - is wrong and fails at point 2, since the prophecy could have been added to the old text AFTER the event occurred that is claimed to have fulfilled it.

I predicted you’d say that but it is ludicrous. What you are saying is that all that was built in order to fulfill a few prophecies and fool people into believing that Baha’u’llah was the return of Christ and a Messiah. At some point people have to use logic and reason and ask why anyone would do that. That is so ridiculous that it does not even warrant a reply.

So what? You think that making a prediction like that means anything? I likewise predict that you will disagree with me! Therefore when you disagree with me, it will further prove I am correct! Mwahahahahahaha! See how silly that argument is?

And my point was that if you have a prophecy that says that a big temple will be built at such-and-such a location, it's perfectly plausible for a person who is aware of that prophecy to say, "Hey, that's actually a pretty good place, I might just build it there just like it said. Gee, thanks, prophecy, for giving me a good idea!"

Of course I would not call that a real prophecy. The event has to come after the prophecy. A prophecy is a foretelling or the prediction of what is to come.

So now you are agreeing with one of the criteria I proposed.

I do not need prophecies to know who Baha’u’llah was. I never even read one page of the Bible until eight years ago, and I have been a Baha’i for over 50 years. I do not need an excuse to believe what I believe. I know that the prophecies were fulfilled by Baha’u’llah because I know that He was the return of Christ and the Messiah.

No, you have a very strong opinion. Believing strongly is not the same as knowing. We've been over this.

I do not care if they failed to meet your criteria; that is what you apparently do not understand. It does not matter to me because I do not go by your criteria.

yes you do. You even admitted that you thought criterion 2 was a good one.

Fine, but you cannot change the way the prophecies were written so if the prophecies do not meet the conditions that need to be met for me to conclude that a prophecy is reliable you will just have to conclude that they are unreliable for you, but you do not get to determine if other people consider them reliable since other people do not go by your criteria.

And when did I ever say otherwise?

“any reliable prophecy must meet five criteria” for YOU to consider it reliable, but it does not have to meet those criteria for OTHER PEOPLE to consider it reliable. Another atheist on this forum had a different set of criteria.

Got a link please?

That is so ludicrous it does not even warrant an answer. How and why would he check every single person in the world?

So he DIDN'T verify that no other person also had the same events happen to them?

Answer the question.

And what question was that? I went back through the conversation and I can't find what question you were asking in regards to this. However, it seems that I asked you to provide an example of a prophecy that meets all five criteria, and you attempted to give me one, but I pointed out that it didn't, and you attempted to defend your claims that it was valid. You never asked me any question about it though.

Unless you have evidence to back that up that is simply a bald assertion, a personal opinion, and as such I can disregard it.

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/b/balch_failed_prophecy.pdf

I do not care if they failed to meet your criteria; that is what you apparently do not understand. It does not matter to me because I do not go by your criteria.

You've already agreed to one of my criteria. What happens if you agree to the others?

 

[Trailblazer]

Funnily enough, there are also criteria by which we can be more confident that a prophecy is correct as well! I've already listed five of them.

1. Numerous prophecies about the same thing
2. Where we have verified that the prophecy was written prior to the event that fulfilled it.
3. Where we have verified that the event that fulfilled it really took place in a way that fulfilled the prophecy.
4. The fulfilling event was not done by someone simply to make the prophecy come true.
5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

All the prophecies that Baha'u'llah fulfilled by His Coming meet your criteria #s 1-4.
No matter how specific it is, no prophecy will ever meet criteria #5 because all prophecies are subject to different interpretations.

 

[Trailblazer]

https://bahai-library.com/pdf/b/balch_failed_prophecy.pdf

I'd be a little more careful about what you grab off the internet. I read the beginning of this article and it is not even about the Baha'i Faith. BUPC are not Baha'is, they are Covenant-breakers, but I am not going to explain what that means right now. Needless to say, Baha'is do not believe what they believe. They are not a sect of the Baha'i Faith as this article claims, because the Baha'i Faith has no sects.

Why do people post this bunk on the internet? Baha'u'llah fulfilled all the prophecies for the return of Christ as was proven in the book Thief in the Night by William Sears.

But if you don't have time to read that right now you can watch this short video which has some of the prophecies.

 

[Katzpur]

I'd be a little more careful about what you grab off the internet. I read the beginning of this article and it is not even about the Baha'i Faith. BUPC are not Baha'is, they are Covenant-breakers, but I am not going to explain what that means right now. Needless to say, Baha'is do not believe what they believe. They are not a sect of the Baha'i Faith as this article claims, because the Baha'i Faith has no sects.

Why do people post this bunk on the internet?

They post nonsense because it's easier to remain uneducated than to take the time to find accurate information. (I have a bit of experience along these lines. )

 

[Tiberius]

All the prophecies that Baha'u'llah fulfilled by His Coming meet your criteria #s 1-4.

Please show this.

No matter how specific it is, no prophecy will ever meet criteria #5 because all prophecies are subject to different interpretations.

I think you're quibbling here.

A prophecy that says, "John Smith will go to the shops" is a lot less vague than one that says, "The King of the Sun will struggle against the princess of the Moon, and a great flood will wash over the land, given new sight to those who are caught up in it."

 

[cataway]

All the prophecies that Baha'u'llah fulfilled by His Coming meet your criteria #s 1-4.
No matter how specific it is, no prophecy will ever meet criteria #5 because all prophecies are subject to different interpretations.

yep even this one
matthew 24:4 In answer Jesus said to them: “Look out that nobody misleads you, 5 for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many. 6 You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for these things must take place, but the end is not yet

 

[Trailblazer]

Please show this.

You expect me to show you all that in a post? But just because I can't do that does not mean they do not meet those criteria.
But if you came up with specific prophecies that you do not believe meet your criteria 1-4 then I could explain how they do.

I think you're quibbling here.

A prophecy that says, "John Smith will go to the shops" is a lot less vague than one that says, "The King of the Sun will struggle against the princess of the Moon, and a great flood will wash over the land, given new sight to those who are caught up in it."

That's true, there are some prophecies that are very specific, such as the following.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

But these prophecies are misinterpreted by Christians who don't believe they mean what they plainly say because they insist Jesus is coming back to this world.

So much for 5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

 

[Tiberius]

That's true, there are some prophecies that are very specific, such as the following.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

But these prophecies are misinterpreted by Christians who don't believe they mean what they plainly say because they insist Jesus is coming back to this world.

So much for 5. The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation.

Do you think that they don't have justifications for their interpretations? You say it plainly says one thing, they say it plainly says another thing. And yet you claim it's not open to interpretation when the fact there are various interpretations clearly says otherwise.

 

[Trailblazer]

Do you think that they don't have justifications for their interpretations? You say it plainly says one thing, they say it plainly says another thing. And yet you claim it's not open to interpretation when the fact there are various interpretations clearly says otherwise.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

The part of the verse where it says: the world seeth me no more means that nobody in the world will see Jesus anymore.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

The part of the verse where it says: I am no more in the world means that Jesus is not going to be in the world anymore.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's look at one interpretation of John 14:19:

"The world," in these contexts, means the unbelieving and fallen human condition. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would come (John 14:16), but noted that unbelievers would neither see nor know Him (John 14:17). Here again He notes that this is the end of His earthly presence, in a form visible even to those who do not believe (John 12:44–46). The disciples, on the other hand, will see Jesus again, and soon (John 16:16; 20:19).
What does John 14:19 mean?

That interpretation won't work and it is a bunch of gobbledygook because the meaning if the word "world" within the context of this verse means the world we live in, earth.

Let's look at another interpretation:

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more,.... The men of the world now see me with their bodily eyes, which is all the sight they have of me; and this they will be deprived of in a very little time; they will see me no more until the time that I shall come in the clouds of heaven to judge the world; and then every eye shall see me:
John 14:19 Commentaries: "After a little while the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me; because I live, you will live also.

The verse says: Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more;
The verse does not say: they will see me no more until the time that I shall come in the clouds of heaven to judge the world; and then every eye shall see me:

Look what he added on to his interpretation! That is called wishful thinking because there are no verses in the New Testament that say that Jesus is coming back to this world to do anything.

It is also helpful to look at this verse in context.

John 14:16-19 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

Before Jesus says that the world would see Him no more, Jesus said that He would not leave us comfortless because he would send another Comforter and the Spirit of truth. "Another Comforter" implies that Jesus was a Comforter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now let's look at John 17:11. I am not going to post all the translations, just a few so you can see that they are different and thus the same verse can mean different things.

KJV
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

NIV
11 I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.

NASB
I am no longer going to be in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I am coming to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, so that they may be one just as We are.

Here are some interpretations:

Shortly after He completes this prayer, Jesus will cross over Kidron and enter the garden of Gethsemane (John 18:1). There, He will be arrested, beginning a process leading to His crucifixion and resurrection (John 12:32–34). As these words are spoken, His ministry "in the world" is over, and the apostles will be left to carry the gospel (John 16:5–11). That world will be hostile to their message (John 16:1–4). However, Jesus has already provided comfort by predicting the coming of the Holy Spirit (John 15:26) and His eventual victory (John 16:33).
What does John 17:11 mean?

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(11) And now I am no more in the world.—The immediate future is still regarded as present. The words have a special reference to the interval between His death and the day of Pentecost, which would be for the disciples a time of darkness and danger, when they would have special need of the Father’s care.
John 17:11 Commentaries: "I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are.

It might be true that in John 17:11 Jesus was referring to His departure from this world, but we have to also look at what Jesus said before this in the same chapter.

John 17:4-5 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

So unless elsewhere in the New Testament Jesus said that He has more work to do, there would be no reason to believe that He was coming back to this world to do more work.

What about the word "finished" do Christians not understand? If Jesus has no more work to do in this world, what would He be coming back for, to play golf with former President Trump?

 

[Tiberius]

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

The part of the verse where it says: the world seeth me no more means that nobody in the world will see Jesus anymore.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

The part of the verse where it says: I am no more in the world means that Jesus is not going to be in the world anymore.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's look at one interpretation of John 14:19:

"The world," in these contexts, means the unbelieving and fallen human condition. Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would come (John 14:16), but noted that unbelievers would neither see nor know Him (John 14:17). Here again He notes that this is the end of His earthly presence, in a form visible even to those who do not believe (John 12:44–46). The disciples, on the other hand, will see Jesus again, and soon (John 16:16; 20:19).
What does John 14:19 mean?

That interpretation won't work and it is a bunch of gobbledygook because the meaning if the word "world" within the context of this verse means the world we live in, earth.

Let's look at another interpretation:

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more,.... The men of the world now see me with their bodily eyes, which is all the sight they have of me; and this they will be deprived of in a very little time; they will see me no more until the time that I shall come in the clouds of heaven to judge the world; and then every eye shall see me:
John 14:19 Commentaries: "After a little while the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me; because I live, you will live also.

The verse says: Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more;
The verse does not say: they will see me no more until the time that I shall come in the clouds of heaven to judge the world; and then every eye shall see me:

Look what he added on to his interpretation! That is called wishful thinking because there are no verses in the New Testament that say that Jesus is coming back to this world to do anything.

It is also helpful to look at this verse in context.

John 14:16-19 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

Before Jesus says that the world would see Him no more, Jesus said that He would not leave us comfortless because he would send another Comforter and the Spirit of truth. "Another Comforter" implies that Jesus was a Comforter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now let's look at John 17:11. I am not going to post all the translations, just a few so you can see that they are different and thus the same verse can mean different things.

KJV
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

NIV
11 I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.

NASB
I am no longer going to be in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I am coming to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, so that they may be one just as We are.

Here are some interpretations:

Shortly after He completes this prayer, Jesus will cross over Kidron and enter the garden of Gethsemane (John 18:1). There, He will be arrested, beginning a process leading to His crucifixion and resurrection (John 12:32–34). As these words are spoken, His ministry "in the world" is over, and the apostles will be left to carry the gospel (John 16:5–11). That world will be hostile to their message (John 16:1–4). However, Jesus has already provided comfort by predicting the coming of the Holy Spirit (John 15:26) and His eventual victory (John 16:33).
What does John 17:11 mean?

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(11) And now I am no more in the world.—The immediate future is still regarded as present. The words have a special reference to the interval between His death and the day of Pentecost, which would be for the disciples a time of darkness and danger, when they would have special need of the Father’s care.
John 17:11 Commentaries: "I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are.

It might be true that in John 17:11 Jesus was referring to His departure from this world, but we have to also look at what Jesus said before this in the same chapter.

John 17:4-5 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

So unless elsewhere in the New Testament Jesus said that He has more work to do, there would be no reason to believe that He was coming back to this world to do more work.

What about the word "finished" do Christians not understand? If Jesus has no more work to do in this world, what would He be coming back for, to play golf with former President Trump?

You'll have to ask Christians. I'm an atheist, so I wouldn't know, and I'm not about to try to interpret a Biblical passage to support either Christianity or Bahai. My aim here is NOT to determine the correct interpretation, my aim is to illustrate to you that there is more than one interpretation possible, and thus, it fails Criteria 5.

If you want a discussion about what the correct interpretation is, then take it somewhere else.

 

[halbhh]

Hi. I deleted my last post regarding this subject because the details were too raw and personal, and while I appreciated the responses, they digressed from the questions.

So, simply, my questions are 1.) If a friend or family member dies and you know they weren't saved, do you still love them and cherish the memories, or do you try to bury it and let go? After all, once in heaven you'll forget anyway. Also, how do you deal with the thought of them suffering in eternal torment even though you know that they deserve it?

Ah, but we don't really know (with such certainty) whether they were saved. We only tend to know how they were at some moment in time, imperfectly.

Without that total seeing into the whole heart (even things they don't realize themselves!), that God has, but we don't have.

And we have no idea what God does with them in those last few seconds of consciousness, as their eyes close or when the heart stops, but the brain is still continuing for a little while....

We don't know what is happening with them in those last moments. But He does.

For those that reject Him (which requires they would know of Him well of course) even in that last secret moment, and then therefore would be expected to go into the "second death", perhaps it's best, merciful that according to scripture read in a very full, complete way, they "perish" in the "second death" -- they don't continue in living, but "perish" -- according to Christ (Who knows more than we do!), it seems human souls are not like angel souls -- not immortal already -- or at least not unless granted to them...because Christ said:
28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.
And He's the One Who ought to know (and better than just the typical pastor or typical doctrinal guesses we hear at times...). And this fits all verses, therefore fits more verses -- it is clearly an 'eternal punishment' (as much as the other notion!).

So, it seems that this other famous verse means what it says:

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.

In other words, those perishing don't have eternal life.

But...about someone in particular, even a loved one we knew well...we don't know their fate, because we don't have that total knowledge of every part of their heart.

 

[Trailblazer]

You'll have to ask Christians. I'm an atheist, so I wouldn't know, and I'm not about to try to interpret a Biblical passage to support either Christianity or Bahai. My aim here is NOT to determine the correct interpretation, my aim is to illustrate to you that there is more than one interpretation possible, and thus, it fails Criteria 5.

If you want a discussion about what the correct interpretation is, then take it somewhere else.

No, I was just demonstrating that there can be more than one interpretation.
Not only that, but more than one interpretation can be correct, and more than one interpretation can be incorrect.

Your criteria #5 The prophecy is specific and is not open to interpretation is completely unrealistic because even if a prophecy is specific it is always open to interpretation and there are as many interpretations as there are people.
That not only applies to prophecies; it applies to anything people write since no two people think exactly alike.

The way we can know which interpretation of a Bible prophecy is correct is by knowing the "big picture" and who the prophecy refers to. Otherwise one is just shooting in the dark. And that is why prophecies are pretty worthless as proof of who was the return of Christ/the Messiah, UNLESS one is willing to look at how those prophecies were fulfilled by the claimant, Baha'u'llah. Once one sees how they were fulfilled everything starts to fall into place.