How are those sources anything but religious sources, especially since they would have claimed to have been in contact with God or spiritual entities? Or even if they are non religious, they are people's personal experiences and personal experience by it's very name, is personal and is only evidence for the person who had the experience and again you give me no reason other than faith to believe those guys over other religious people who say differently.
Those sources were not religious sources although the book Heaven and Hell was written by a Christian who fell away from orthodox Christianity. All of them are based upon departed spirits contacted through mediums. Yes, it is the personal experiences of those spirits, but that is the only way to get the information before we actually die and have the same experiences.
I do not know if all the details in the books is accurate and even the spirits said they have trouble conveying exactly what the spiritual world is like, because there are no words to describe what is so different than this world. However, what comes through from the spirits is closely aligned with what Baha’u’llah wrote about the afterlife. Other religions do not align with what comes through in spirit communications.
So what? New doesn't mean true. Other religions would have been new in their time but that didn't necessarily make them true. And again, you're not getting it, you believe it has information about the soul and the afterlife and even updates about those things but you have no way to demonstrate that the information is true or it's updated, you just keep claiming stuff as though it's true without demonstrating it to be true.
No, new does not equate to true; one has to do the necessary independent investigation in order to determine if it is true. Nobody can prove that to them, thye have to prove it to themselves.
I know it is new and updated because it was revealed in the 19th century, long after the other religions were revealed.
This makes no sense for a few reasons:
1) it makes no sense for an immaterial thing to be capable of interacting with and controlling a material thing since they're two completely different substances, it's like trying to get oil and water to interact with each other ie. it's impossible and doesn't happen.
I see no reason what an immaterial thing (soul) could not affect a material thing (body). The soul is a mystery so we do not know how it interacts with the body.
2) it makes no sense for a soul to have a body if it can exist perfectly fine on it's own without a body.
The soul cannot exist without a body. In this world the soul need a body to work through and in the spiritual world the soul needs a spiritual body.
3) it's inconsistent with what's known about the brain and how it works ie. it makes no sense for there to be a soul that stores one's memories, personality etc when damage to the brain causes personality changes or loss of memories occurs naturally in old age like Alzheimer's... if there's an immaterial soul that's unaffected by physical damage or other wear and tear over time to the body then it makes no sense for any of those things to happen.
The soul does not store all of that, the brain does. Damage to the brain affects the body but not the soul.
Your body is not in charge of your consciousness, your soul is, but while you are alive in a body, your soul works through the brain. The soul communicates its desires through the brain to the physical body, which thereby expresses itself in various ways. The soul is responsible for the mind, senses and emotions as well as physical sensations, but these are expressed through the body. When the brain is damaged hindrances interpose themselves between the soul and the body and cause physical illness. However, the soul remains unaffected.
The soul is like the light of the lamp. An external object may interfere with its brightness, but the light itself continues to shine. Or think about the soul as the sun above the clouds. The clouds are simply preventing us from seeing the sunshine, but the sun is shining just as brightly nevertheless.
Every illness afflicting the body of man is an impediment that prevents the soul from manifesting its inherent might and power. When the soul leaves the body, however, it will be unaffected by any bodily ailments and it will be able to fully manifest its power.
“Know thou that the soul of man is exalted above, and is independent of all infirmities of body or mind. That a sick person showeth signs of weakness is due to the hindrances that interpose themselves between his soul and his body, for the soul itself remaineth unaffected by any bodily ailments.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 153-154
And that's why there's no point trying to find out which, if any is true... if it's untestable then why bother look to see which one is true, it would basically be a fool's errand.
Testing it is not how you determine it is true. You have to investigate it, do research, and then evaluate it to determine if it is true or not.
“The first principle Baha’u’llah urged was the independent investigation of truth. “Each individual,” He said, “is following the faith of his ancestors who themselves are lost in the maze of tradition. Reality is steeped in dogmas and doctrines. If each investigate for himself, he will find that Reality is one; does not admit of multiplicity; is not divisible. All will find the same foundation and all will be at peace.” – Abdu’l-Baha, Star of the West, Volume 3, p. 5.
“Bahá’u’lláh asked no one to accept His statements and His tokens blindly. On the contrary, He put in the very forefront of His teachings emphatic warnings against blind acceptance of authority, and urged all to open their eyes and ears, and use their own judgement, independently and fearlessly, in order to ascertain the truth. He enjoined the fullest investigation and never concealed Himself, offering, as the supreme proofs of His Prophethood, His words and works and their effects in transforming the lives and characters of men.”Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 8
“What does it mean to investigate reality? It means that man must forget all hearsay and examine truth himself, for he does not know whether statements he hears are in accordance with reality or not. Wherever he finds truth or reality, he must hold to it, forsaking, discarding all else; for outside of reality there is naught but superstition and imagination.” – Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 62.
And that's why there are so many religions and people belonging to different religions who all believe different and even contradictory things about God, the soul, afterlife etc. again as I said earlier, it's a fool's errand trying to find out who's right, you can't use your intelligence because you'll never be able to know for sure if you're right... those same people used their intelligence and they ended up believing differently than you so intelligence doesn't guarantee truth.
Most people who belong to a religion were raised in that religion so they never investigated it for themselves. Some people in adult lie do their own investigation and join a religion and they believe they are right. All the major religions are right for the ages in which they were revealed but they do not apply to all time, because they do not have the remedy humanity needs in the present time. If a religion does not suit the needs of the time, I see no reason to consider it.
“The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213
Also, religions lose their potency over time and they become distorted by humans who misinterpret the scriptures. That is why it makes sense to look at the current religion of God rather than the older ones.
How can you be so sure you're right and they're wrong? What if you're interpreting things wrongly? What if they're right and you've been wrong all along? How would you know?
That is not something I can explain. Part of it is because I was guided by God but why I believe it is also based upon rationality. I know I cannot be wrong because it is logical to me that God would not reveal one religion that is right or all time and say all the others are false. The Baha’i Faith teaches that all the religions were right for the ages in which they were revealed but that religion needs to be renewed in every age, and also God had a new message in every age that suits the needs of the time.
Referring to all the world’s great religions, Baha’u’llah wrote: that they all proceed from One Source, God.
“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
And I say that a lot.
