Trailblazer
Veteran Member
So maybe you also remember why I refused to agree.I remember that.
I also remember that you refused to agree that the mystery man I spoke of who met these criteria was a messenger from God...
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
So maybe you also remember why I refused to agree.I remember that.
I also remember that you refused to agree that the mystery man I spoke of who met these criteria was a messenger from God...
Yes, good, but there is also "ye shall know them by their fruits".Basically... Deuteronomy 18:21-22, "And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."
If you religion hasn't any such messengers, what proves its legitimacy to you?
So maybe you also remember why I refused to agree.
But at the time of Moshe would you have followed him? How would you have known he was given the true religion and not some other group?My starting point is the Baha'i Faith. I believe that what Moses taught is a true religion of God because of what the Baha'i Faith teaches, including what Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha wrote about Moses. It is for the same reason that I believe in all the Prophets of the past. The Prophets that Baha'u'llah verifies are written about in The Kitáb-i-Íqán. although there might be other Prophets that were not mentioned. If you enter 'Moses' into the Search box you can read what He wrote about Moses.
They were people just like us, but learned of their time and wise. Some engaged in teaching, others engaged in contemplation, some helping and advising kings in their daily affairs (Family priests - Kula Guru, Like Sage Vasishtha was to Lord Rama's family). The king bowed to the Kula-guru, and sat on the throne only after the Kula-guru had taken his seat. Kula-guru was the most respected person in a king's court, more than even the king.Hinduism has gurūs or spiritual teachers, as I am not quite sure what the ṛṣis mentioned in our scriptures were, ..
Talking of legitimacy - what is the legitimacy of Bahaollah himself (other than the belief of Bahais)? Rebottled Seventh Century Islamic stuff with Allah, prophets and prophecies, with some success by Bahaollah, and with greater success by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of the Ahmadiyyas.The Prophets that Baha'u'llah verifies are written about ..
My religion is Sanātana Dharma, better known as Hinduism. While Abrahamic religions have prophets, Hinduism has gurūs or spiritual teachers, as @JustGeorge mentioned, as well as ṛṣis (usually written as rishis in English). I am not quite sure what the ṛṣis mentioned in our scriptures were, so I will have to do some research.
When it comes to evidence for the legitimacy of Hinduism, my view is that my inner spiritual experiences tell me that Hinduism is legitimate. One experience that did it for me had to do with the sound Oṃ. A lot of our scriptures, probably starting with the Upaniṣads, mention that the syllable Oṃ is the Self or Ātman who pervades the worlds and is their source. When I was in my early 20s, there was a time when I used to meditate on that syllable by mentally intoning it as I breathed in and out. One night, as I did my meditation, the very sound Oṃ 'turned into' consciousness that was boundless in its presence and utterly tranquil. The experience lasted for about two seconds, and it showed me that this Hindu teaching is true: there is an omnipresent Self who is consciousness. Funnily, I later dismissed that experience and joined an Abrahamic religion. Today, I realize that I need to control my skeptical attitude so that I don't so easily dismiss my spiritual experiences and run off to some other religion.
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet? What are the criteria?
If you religion hasn't any such messengers, what proves its legitimacy to you? That is, why this faith instead of another faith? What makes it more true to you than another one that you choose to follow it?
For the sake that it is a debate and for the sake of that person who wants to better understand the concept of prophecy I will add some support for my comments.
Don't believe what people tell you about prophets. Its ignorance, generally speaking. Sorry, but it just is. From childhood onward untruths and ignorance are all around us. We awake as if from sweet dreams into a creepy, dangerously rotten house with sticky floors, perhaps making it out of the door before it all collapses.
Preachers and their followers will claim that all of the answers are in the canon, but beginning only with the protestant canon there is no definition of 'Prophecy'. instead there are questions. Are prophets dreamers? Are they miracle workers? Are they humans who command the powers of both God and nature? Do they serve the L-RD, command the L-RD? They act somewhat like wizards in modern tales, don't they? A corpse once falls onto the bones of a prophet, and the man is resurrected! Some prophets split water. Some don't. Some we are told are elevated. Some we are told are great. There is a "School of prophets." We are told everything about prophets except what a prophet is and what a prophet is for.
Prophet this, prophet that; but we never are told what they are -- not in the canon. We are only told some things they do. This is why its so handy to limit children to reading the canon, because then you can define things for those children. You can rope them in and make them stay like children. The material is self referential when you leave out key information. I think and protest that people are kept ignorant when told from childhood or from their first inklings of Christianity that the canon has all of the answers. No. It has all of the questions. They are important questions but not answers.
There is general ignorance about prophets which I will demonstrate. There are three prophets who have miracles involving the traversal of water. Why? No one ever talks about this except the really nerdy bible students. Try finding a discussing of it here or on *any* religious forum anywhere prior to today, September 20, 2021. No one even keeps count. In fact I may have counted wrong, but most people visiting this site won't be able to either correct me or assure me. They will have to look it up or search for the information. People have given up on asking questions. Their questions while growing up have been deflected. They have stopped asking having been frustrated repeatedly by expecting the answers where they were not.
So what is a prophet? For centuries lay people have wondered if Nostradamus, psychic, was a prophet. That shows, demonstrates, guarantees that there has been widespread ignorance of Jewish prophets. If we can't even tell the difference between Nostradamus and a prophet then we have fallen far in our knowledge of prophets. If we think they are prove-ers who prove the accuracy of scripture. Then Nostradamus is legit, because he proves things. If we think they are miracle workers then every miracle worker may redefine morality as they see fit! If miracles are prophecy then we are ****ed, and I say that knowing full well it is crude. The absurdity requires the worst possible crude expression to help manage the pain of it. Did not Elijah once make a dirty joke?
My comment to the person who starts reading this thread not knowing what prophets are in the Christian scriptures: Every prophecy is about moral issues. Always.
Every miracle acts like a parable which illustrates some point or another. Nobody else gets a miracle! Nobody else, no matter how much they need it or cry or beg. The words of the prophet are the miracle that everyone else gets. The moral lesson is the gift from God, to be cherished in the face of loss, death and suffering. Nobody else's child is resurrected. Nobody else's cat is pulled out of a tree. Only one person is punished by being turned to salt, and the rest are ignored. One city is destroyed or one country or a fig tree. All is not set aright. One thing is. The point is made, and the miracles stop. If two miracles seems similar pay attention. There is a reason why, and you are supposed to find out why. If a bird loses a feather miraculously there is a reason, and you're supposed to ask what that reason is. Find the reason, or miss the lesson of the miracle. Incorporate that lesson and you receive the reward which is the prophet's true miracle, the wisdom they have obtained and shared at great personal cost.
Morals are the miracle, not the physical miracles people crave. The Greeks claimed to have oracles that could speak of the future, but the prophets of Judaism could find truths in God. This was their super power, and they despised the feeble guidance of the oracles preferring rather to learn eternal principles.
Missed my emphasis! Thanks though. I don't mention ESP or at least don't intend to pin any of my support on its existence or nonexistence. I only say that Jewish prophets seem interested in eternal moral wisdom not in oracles. The L-RD's claim to fame is to state something and then make it happen, not that it can be predicted. The L-RD rather than making predictions, creates...at least according to some quotes from a prophet or two...which I would need to look up. It is what I think based on some verses I have read. The oracles of the Greeks predict things with ESP or something similar real or fake it matters not. They don't claim to create the future or cause things.Professor of statistics, Dr. Jessica Utts (currently at the University of California, Irvine), proved that ESP is real. Please google her, and understand that you need facts in order to assert your belief that ESP is false.
The same way that I know that Baha'u'llah was given the true religion, by looking at His Person, what He was doing on His Mission, and whatever He said, given what was written in the Torah had not been recorded yet.But at the time of Moshe would you have followed him? How would you have known he was given the true religion and not some other group?
Are Gurus thought to be messengers from the Hindu God or r Gods? If so they could qualify as the not predicting the future sort of prophets.
If your religion has prophets or a prophet, messengers etc., how do you determine that he is or was a prophet? What are the criteria?
If you religion hasn't any such messengers, what proves its legitimacy to you? That is, why this faith instead of another faith? What makes it more true to you than another one that you choose to follow it?
I was told that a Guru was the person who took you from the darkness into the light.
I suppose that could be interpreted in different ways.
I guess you forgot why I would not agree. I wanted to know what the name of the guy and you would not tell me.Well, it seems like you didn't want to actually stand behind your claims.
Trailblazer: "Here's a bunch of criteria that a person needs to meet in order to be considered a messenger from God."
Tiberius: "Hey, I've heard of this guy who meets those criteria. Would you consider him to be a messenger from God?"
Trailblazer: "Um.... no."
What would you like to find about Hindu Rishis? Perhaps I can be of some help.If you find anything about "Rishi's" in Hindu scripture, please be kind enough to share it. Thats a request if you have time. Thank you so much.
What would you like to find about Hindu Rishis? Perhaps I can be of some help.
Oh yes. The 'tablets' and the archives of the House of Justice. As time goes by more will crop up.The same way that I know that Baha'u'llah was given the true religion, by looking at His Person, what He was doing on His Mission, and whatever He said, given what was written in the Torah had not been recorded yet.