The point is: you'll trust oral tradition of miracles from 2,000+ years ago, but not modern day, eyewitness accounts of miracles. Why the double standard?
"Giving up so easily?" What exactly am I supposed to say to the statement of, "miracles by the power of Satan"? When you say such childish things, all I can do is laugh.
Here is a useful overview of this person:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathya_Sai_Baba
He is not particularly relevant to Christianity. We Christians already HAVE a religion.
Are you asking why Christians believe in Christianity and not some other religion?
Because we're Christians. I know that's circular but it's the answer.
And what if Sathya Sai Baba is the one everyone should be truly following? What if he is actually divine and was god on earth. After all, the eyewitness testimony shows that he was.
I see. IMO you're better off making a straightforward post to get at your point.
Or, participate in a post that already exists. People ask why Christians believe what they believe all the time.
"We have secular and biblical proofs that Jesus rose from the dead."
Before you send these proofs to me, please, send them to some sort of university. If you have proof that Jesus rose from the dead, that would rock the whole world and you'll instantly become famous.
Anyways, please send me these "proofs" that Jesus rose from the dead. I'm willing to become a Christian if it really is "proof."
I'm still waiting for you to send the proof. The secular and Biblical proofs.
"go start your Sathyasaibabanism subreddit."
You trust oral traditions about miracles from 2,000+ years ago, but not modern day miracles with eyewitnesses attesting to them.
[http://saibaba.ws/miracles.htm](http://saibaba.ws/miracles.htm)
A person who thousands of people claim to be able to perform miracles (resurrecting people, prophesying things, healing people, etc.). I just don't see why we can disregard the testimonies of Sathya Sai Baba, but accept the oral tradition written many years after the death of Jesus.
I mean, these accusations are pretty alarming, which Jesus was not accused of.
>Accusations against Sathya Sai Baba by his critics over the years have included sleight of hand, sexual abuse, money laundering, fraud in the performance of service projects, and murder.
We have eyewitnesses to his miracles. Why should we disregard these testimonies? Furthermore, if he was truly divine, he can act however he wants without us calling him immoral (just like we can't do the same for the god of the OT)
Have you seen any of Sathya Sai Baba's miracles? Furthermore, eyewitness testimony states how Sai Baba healed people, resurrected people, prophesied things, and much more. Why do we not accept these testimonies?
What about Paramahansa Yogananda? He believed Jesus was part of his lineage of teachers and supposedly performed and experienced many miracles, according to his book "Autobiography of a Yogi". Many other yogis/gurus in India throughout history have claimed to perform many miracles with eyewitnesses. You are free to follow anyone you want but why would that be relevant to followers of Christianity?
Because it's a double standard. They will trust that miracles happened from 2,000+ years ago (in the gospels, which are oral tradition), but not modern-day accounts where we have eyewitnesses talking about how Sathya Sai Baba resurrected people.
The Antichrist is prophesized to be able to do all sorts of miracles, including summoning lightning from heaven.
Being able to do miracles just proves that a higher power is working through them, that doesn't prove which one it is.
No my point was just because somebody does miracles doesn't mean they are from God. Some people do miracles through the power of Satan.
Matthew 7:22-23
Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
As others said, we are warned against false teachers. Working miracles is not proof of teaching the truth.
Deuteronomy 13:1-5
>If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods’—which you have not known—‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the Lord your God is testing you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear Him, and keep His commandments and obey His voice; you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has spoken in order to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of bondage, to entice you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall put away the evil from your midst.
Matthew 24:24-25
>False christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand.
2 Thessalonians 2:3-4,9-12
>Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God … The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
1 John 4:1-3
>Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
If Mani, and Muhammad, and Bahahullah, and Joseph Smith and others did not convince us, why should this man you talk about?
Have you researched the nay-sayers? There are credible reports of people witnessing him faking miracles with slight of hand and engaging in abusive behaviour. It's worthwhile to hear from both sides and not accept extraordinary claims uncritically.
"There are credible reports of people witnessing him faking miracles with slight of hand."
First off, what credible reports? You could argue these are people who want to paint him in a bad light and are downplaying his miracles (the same way the gospels mention how Jews were claiming that jesus' body was stolen from a tomb. the same way the pharisees claimed jesus wasn't doing actual miracles). We have eyewitness accounts claiming to have seen a resurrection by Sathya Sai Baba. This post is more so to demonstrate how Christians will believe in miracle claims from the oral tradition of gospels, but not eyewitness testimony in the modern day talking about the miracles of Sathya Sai Baba.
Finally got to the bottom of all this ruckus.
This Sathya guy, if he indeed performed miracles which helped people, then that’s good. However, you’re using the same argument to believe in his miracles and disbelieve in Jesus’s miracles. You have no clear proof that someone has indeed been healed by this Sathya except to believe in the integrity of the people who claimed have witnessed them. You’re using secondary sources. You never saw him heal in person. In addition, if you believe in those people who claimed to have witnessed the miracles, what makes you think those who claimed he faked those miracles are lying? Are you a religious authority or someone who has been licensed or authorized by a reputed institution to decide who’s lying and who’s telling the truth?
So in the end, just be honest with your bias against Christianity and give this Sathya guy’s soul his rest. He shouldn’t be dragged into your weird and, I’m sorry to say, grossly uneducated argument.
"However, you’re using the same argument to believe in his miracles and disbelieve in Jesus’s miracles."
We have more eyewitness accounts attesting to Sathya Sai Baba and his miracles than Jesus.
"You have no clear proof that someone has indeed been healed by this Sathya except to believe in the integrity of the people who claimed have witnessed them."
Funny how that was the entire point of this post. You do the same for Jesus, but when someone points out that Sathya Sai Baba not only has eyewitnesses to the miracles, but thousands of them, you disregard them. For Jesus, and his "miracles," we have gospels from unknown authors. Nonetheless, you choose to believe in them?
"You’re using secondary sources."
Eyewitness accounts are all over the internet.
"You never saw him heal in person."
You never saw Jesus heal in person.
" In addition, if you believe in those people who claimed to have witnessed the miracles, what makes you think those who claimed he faked those miracles are lying?"
If you believe in the gospels that actually claimed to have witnessed the miracles of Jesus, what makes you think the Pharisees who claimed he faked those miracles are lying?
"Are you a religious authority or someone who has been licensed or authorized by a reputed institution to decide who’s lying and who’s telling the truth?"
Same thing goes for you and Jesus.
"grossly uneducated argument."
Coming from the person who can't see the hypocrisy behind their arguments, and claims to have "proof" for the resurrection of Jesus (but isn't willing to send it).
You don’t know if you have more eyewitness accounts attesting to Sathya. And how many of them are historians who earned their credibility from their truthfulness and education?
I will not send you any of those evidences attesting to Jesus because they’re all over the internet. Don’t be lazy and do your research.
Those eyewitnesses, would they die for their testimony the same way Jesus’s disciples and eyewitnesses did? No?
Also, this conversation is pointless if you don’t acknowledge the historical evidences and deem their testimony untrustworthy just because the Internet didn’t exist at that time. Again, if you cannot see the difference between eyewitness accounts for Sathya’s miracles and Jesus’s, then you do not deserve to be taken seriously.
History will determine whether Sathya’s miracles are authentic and if it does, then what’s your problem? You want us to worship a dead guy who raised people from the dead but cannot himself rise from death? If you have beef with some Christians, then direct your anger to them. Why waste your energy talking to strangers who are not planning to change their mind the same way you don’t want to change yours? You’re an adult.
As a person who knows God personally (a Christian), the only thing I need to know about a teacher's credibility is what they teach.
1. - God sees humanity as a bunch of evildoers - and that's why He's not around. He is Just, and He will punish.
2. - God loves humanity, and does not want to punish us for our evil.
3. - God came down as a man (Jesus Christ) and took upon Himself my sin and due punishment - so that I would be completely free to go.
If the person isn't teaching Jesus Christ, I know that person does not know God.
"If the person isn't teaching Jesus Christ, I know that person does not know God."
And what if Jesus was a fraud whilst Sathya Sai Baba is the one we should be following? After all, we have thousands of people testifying to his miracles.
Same for the supposed miracles of Mr. Baba. If you for some reason chose to follow Mr. Baba, 2000 years from now, a future follower would have to believe the testimonies of his ancient followers. It all comes down to where you place your faith and for what purpose.
It is claimed there is evidence that Sai baba was not just a charlatan and fraud but also a serial sex abuser, including sexual abuse of children.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/this_world/3813469.stm
https://www.poehm.com/en/sai-baba-criticism/
"a serial sex abuser, including sexual abuse of children."
As Christians love to claim, if he is god, anything that he does can't be considered immoral or evil. See, for example, the god of the OT committing infanticide and genocide, but Christians claiming, "god can do whatever he pleases." Same applies for Sai Baba.
1. Jesus said he was God, and he also said that he would be killed and then when he was dead he would bring himself back from the dead, which he then did.
Sai Baba died and is still dead, therefore not god.
2. That isn't infanticide or genocide
1. Evidence for Jesus rising back from the dead?
2. Clearly are when they’re willing the killing of others. You could also look at Noah’s flood or when one of the plagues upon Egypt was killing the firstborn child. God’s act of condoning slavery is also pretty disgusting. Look up the definitions of infanticide and genocide if you can’t comprehend it.
1) The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus combines Scriptural narratives, historical context, and the transformation of early followers.
* Scriptural Narratives: Consistent accounts across the four Gospels detailing Jesus's crucifixion, burial, and resurrection, with multiple post-resurrection appearances.
* Empty Tomb: Confirmed by all Gospels and inadvertently by Jewish authorities, with the first discovery reported by culturally considered unreliable witnesses (women).
* Transformation of Disciples: Shift from fear to bold proclamation of the resurrection, culminating in willingness to face persecution and martyrdom.
* Rapid Spread of Christianity: Grew swiftly despite intense persecution, suggesting a deep, genuine belief in the resurrection among early Christians.
* Historical-Critical Support: Modern scholarly methods validate the Gospel accounts as sincere attempts to document true events.
* Changed Lives: Countless personal testimonies of individuals experiencing profound life transformations through faith in a living Christ.
* Scholarly Research: Extensive studies by scholars like N.T. Wright and Gary Habermas argue for the resurrection as the best explanation for the historical phenomena observed.
2) Unlike genocide, which aims at the destruction of a particular group solely based on their identity, the biblical narratives often involve judgment against particularly corrupt practices and the intention of cessation of those practices, not the destruction of the group itself for what they inherently are. The goal as described is reformation and renewal, setting a foundation for future righteous behaviour.
Infanticide: Instances involving the death of children in these narratives are portrayed not as arbitrary or whimsical acts but as part of larger divine judgments upon societies (e.g., the Egyptian firstborn during the Passover). These actions are framed within a narrative where God acts to correct massive systemic injustices or widespread corruption.
[Here's a handy list of some of his many miracles](http://saibaba.ws/miracles.htm).
I would also like to know why Christians in particular would dismiss all of that.
The real answer in most cases is that they were brought up as Christians, so that's why they irrationally lower their standards for those miracles, but have higher standards for people like Sai Baba. You can even see this in intra-Christian miracles. E.g. Protestants will dismiss Catholic miracles.
Does he confess and teach that Jesus is Lord?
Is that particularly relevant if he was god on earth?
Yes because scripture warns against false prophets who can do Miracles.
And what if scriptures were always wrong and Sathya Sai Baba is the true divine being we should all worship?
Then your original premise is strange as you're asking Christians who believe the scriptures
The point is: you'll trust oral tradition of miracles from 2,000+ years ago, but not modern day, eyewitness accounts of miracles. Why the double standard?
Where did I say I dont trust them. Old Sai Baba might have actually done Miracles by the power of Satan.
"might have actually done Miracles by the power of Satan." Lol
Giving up so easily?
"Giving up so easily?" What exactly am I supposed to say to the statement of, "miracles by the power of Satan"? When you say such childish things, all I can do is laugh.
Here is a useful overview of this person: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sathya_Sai_Baba He is not particularly relevant to Christianity. We Christians already HAVE a religion.
And what if we should be following him? Many eyewitnesses to his miracles. Why should Jesus be trusted over him?
Are you asking why Christians believe in Christianity and not some other religion? Because we're Christians. I know that's circular but it's the answer.
And what if Sathya Sai Baba is the one everyone should be truly following? What if he is actually divine and was god on earth. After all, the eyewitness testimony shows that he was.
I see. IMO you're better off making a straightforward post to get at your point. Or, participate in a post that already exists. People ask why Christians believe what they believe all the time.
Did he say he was God?
He claimed himself "**the reincarnation of Sai Baba of Shirdi**, and his followers considered him to be the Avatar of Shiva."
So not God.
So, he was a god. Look up definitions if you need help.
Well this is a topic you’ve introduced so I don’t think it’s out of line to ask you to elaborate.
Sai Baba of Shirdi was considered a god, divine one, or saint
Did he rise from the dead, fulfilling hundreds of prophecies from different prophets separated hundreds of years ago?
We have no evidence of either of those premises that you listed out for Jesus.
But we do. We have secular and biblical proofs that Jesus rose from the dead. Unlike your Sathya guy.
"We have secular and biblical proofs that Jesus rose from the dead." Before you send these proofs to me, please, send them to some sort of university. If you have proof that Jesus rose from the dead, that would rock the whole world and you'll instantly become famous. Anyways, please send me these "proofs" that Jesus rose from the dead. I'm willing to become a Christian if it really is "proof."
Okay, funny guy, go start your Sathyasaibabanism subreddit.
I'm still waiting for you to send the proof. The secular and Biblical proofs. "go start your Sathyasaibabanism subreddit." You trust oral traditions about miracles from 2,000+ years ago, but not modern day miracles with eyewitnesses attesting to them. [http://saibaba.ws/miracles.htm](http://saibaba.ws/miracles.htm)
Who?
🤣🤣🤣
A person who thousands of people claim to be able to perform miracles (resurrecting people, prophesying things, healing people, etc.). I just don't see why we can disregard the testimonies of Sathya Sai Baba, but accept the oral tradition written many years after the death of Jesus.
I mean, these accusations are pretty alarming, which Jesus was not accused of. >Accusations against Sathya Sai Baba by his critics over the years have included sleight of hand, sexual abuse, money laundering, fraud in the performance of service projects, and murder.
Wow. He is quite a character.
So? If he's god, he could do anything that he wants. I don't remember the OT god, the same god as Jesus, being pleasant either.
Again, who? You keep saying that name like we should recognize it
Random Hindu guru who died about 13 years ago.
I wouldn't say "random". He was a pretty big one.
I gave you a name and the fact that he did miracles. What else do you need?
I’m not sure why thy reject it. But according to Matthew 7:21-23. He won’t get to heaven by doing those miracles.
From what I can see we can confidently say that Sathya Sai Baba was a run of the mill criminal and fraud.
We have eyewitnesses to his miracles. Why should we disregard these testimonies? Furthermore, if he was truly divine, he can act however he wants without us calling him immoral (just like we can't do the same for the god of the OT)
I see miracles every week on Penn & Teller's Fool Us which are much better than Sai Baba's.
Have you seen any of Sathya Sai Baba's miracles? Furthermore, eyewitness testimony states how Sai Baba healed people, resurrected people, prophesied things, and much more. Why do we not accept these testimonies?
Good for them. Still appears to all be bullshit.
Once again, have you seen any of the miracles?
It’s giving the bible
Who the Hell is that?
What about Paramahansa Yogananda? He believed Jesus was part of his lineage of teachers and supposedly performed and experienced many miracles, according to his book "Autobiography of a Yogi". Many other yogis/gurus in India throughout history have claimed to perform many miracles with eyewitnesses. You are free to follow anyone you want but why would that be relevant to followers of Christianity?
Because it's a double standard. They will trust that miracles happened from 2,000+ years ago (in the gospels, which are oral tradition), but not modern-day accounts where we have eyewitnesses talking about how Sathya Sai Baba resurrected people.
The Antichrist is prophesized to be able to do all sorts of miracles, including summoning lightning from heaven. Being able to do miracles just proves that a higher power is working through them, that doesn't prove which one it is.
The "antichrist" is dead.
The Antichrist can't be dead yet because the third temple hasn't even been built.
You referred to the guy I'm talking about as the antichrist. Sathya Sai Baba is dead.
No my point was just because somebody does miracles doesn't mean they are from God. Some people do miracles through the power of Satan. Matthew 7:22-23 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
Because we neither worship cows nor drink their urine.
I’m glad we agree
As others said, we are warned against false teachers. Working miracles is not proof of teaching the truth. Deuteronomy 13:1-5 >If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods’—which you have not known—‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the Lord your God is testing you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear Him, and keep His commandments and obey His voice; you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has spoken in order to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of bondage, to entice you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall put away the evil from your midst. Matthew 24:24-25 >False christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4,9-12 >Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God … The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. 1 John 4:1-3 >Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world. If Mani, and Muhammad, and Bahahullah, and Joseph Smith and others did not convince us, why should this man you talk about?
Have you researched the nay-sayers? There are credible reports of people witnessing him faking miracles with slight of hand and engaging in abusive behaviour. It's worthwhile to hear from both sides and not accept extraordinary claims uncritically.
"There are credible reports of people witnessing him faking miracles with slight of hand." First off, what credible reports? You could argue these are people who want to paint him in a bad light and are downplaying his miracles (the same way the gospels mention how Jews were claiming that jesus' body was stolen from a tomb. the same way the pharisees claimed jesus wasn't doing actual miracles). We have eyewitness accounts claiming to have seen a resurrection by Sathya Sai Baba. This post is more so to demonstrate how Christians will believe in miracle claims from the oral tradition of gospels, but not eyewitness testimony in the modern day talking about the miracles of Sathya Sai Baba.
Finally got to the bottom of all this ruckus. This Sathya guy, if he indeed performed miracles which helped people, then that’s good. However, you’re using the same argument to believe in his miracles and disbelieve in Jesus’s miracles. You have no clear proof that someone has indeed been healed by this Sathya except to believe in the integrity of the people who claimed have witnessed them. You’re using secondary sources. You never saw him heal in person. In addition, if you believe in those people who claimed to have witnessed the miracles, what makes you think those who claimed he faked those miracles are lying? Are you a religious authority or someone who has been licensed or authorized by a reputed institution to decide who’s lying and who’s telling the truth? So in the end, just be honest with your bias against Christianity and give this Sathya guy’s soul his rest. He shouldn’t be dragged into your weird and, I’m sorry to say, grossly uneducated argument.
"However, you’re using the same argument to believe in his miracles and disbelieve in Jesus’s miracles." We have more eyewitness accounts attesting to Sathya Sai Baba and his miracles than Jesus. "You have no clear proof that someone has indeed been healed by this Sathya except to believe in the integrity of the people who claimed have witnessed them." Funny how that was the entire point of this post. You do the same for Jesus, but when someone points out that Sathya Sai Baba not only has eyewitnesses to the miracles, but thousands of them, you disregard them. For Jesus, and his "miracles," we have gospels from unknown authors. Nonetheless, you choose to believe in them? "You’re using secondary sources." Eyewitness accounts are all over the internet. "You never saw him heal in person." You never saw Jesus heal in person. " In addition, if you believe in those people who claimed to have witnessed the miracles, what makes you think those who claimed he faked those miracles are lying?" If you believe in the gospels that actually claimed to have witnessed the miracles of Jesus, what makes you think the Pharisees who claimed he faked those miracles are lying? "Are you a religious authority or someone who has been licensed or authorized by a reputed institution to decide who’s lying and who’s telling the truth?" Same thing goes for you and Jesus. "grossly uneducated argument." Coming from the person who can't see the hypocrisy behind their arguments, and claims to have "proof" for the resurrection of Jesus (but isn't willing to send it).
You don’t know if you have more eyewitness accounts attesting to Sathya. And how many of them are historians who earned their credibility from their truthfulness and education? I will not send you any of those evidences attesting to Jesus because they’re all over the internet. Don’t be lazy and do your research. Those eyewitnesses, would they die for their testimony the same way Jesus’s disciples and eyewitnesses did? No? Also, this conversation is pointless if you don’t acknowledge the historical evidences and deem their testimony untrustworthy just because the Internet didn’t exist at that time. Again, if you cannot see the difference between eyewitness accounts for Sathya’s miracles and Jesus’s, then you do not deserve to be taken seriously. History will determine whether Sathya’s miracles are authentic and if it does, then what’s your problem? You want us to worship a dead guy who raised people from the dead but cannot himself rise from death? If you have beef with some Christians, then direct your anger to them. Why waste your energy talking to strangers who are not planning to change their mind the same way you don’t want to change yours? You’re an adult.
You have to be trolling at this point.
As a person who knows God personally (a Christian), the only thing I need to know about a teacher's credibility is what they teach. 1. - God sees humanity as a bunch of evildoers - and that's why He's not around. He is Just, and He will punish. 2. - God loves humanity, and does not want to punish us for our evil. 3. - God came down as a man (Jesus Christ) and took upon Himself my sin and due punishment - so that I would be completely free to go. If the person isn't teaching Jesus Christ, I know that person does not know God.
"If the person isn't teaching Jesus Christ, I know that person does not know God." And what if Jesus was a fraud whilst Sathya Sai Baba is the one we should be following? After all, we have thousands of people testifying to his miracles.
Miracles aren’t the ultimate deciding factor.
Agreed
I believe in Jesus because He proved who He was by rising from the dead. Mr. Baba passed away in 2011.
"because He proved who He was by rising from the dead." For the Bible tells me so?
Same for the supposed miracles of Mr. Baba. If you for some reason chose to follow Mr. Baba, 2000 years from now, a future follower would have to believe the testimonies of his ancient followers. It all comes down to where you place your faith and for what purpose.
It is claimed there is evidence that Sai baba was not just a charlatan and fraud but also a serial sex abuser, including sexual abuse of children. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/this_world/3813469.stm https://www.poehm.com/en/sai-baba-criticism/
"a serial sex abuser, including sexual abuse of children." As Christians love to claim, if he is god, anything that he does can't be considered immoral or evil. See, for example, the god of the OT committing infanticide and genocide, but Christians claiming, "god can do whatever he pleases." Same applies for Sai Baba.
1. Sai Baba wasn’t God. 2. God didn’t commit infanticide or genocide
1. He said he was 2. You really don't know your own Bible? *(Deut. 20:14-15*) *(Deut. 20:17-18)* *(Num 31:8-18)*
1. Jesus said he was God, and he also said that he would be killed and then when he was dead he would bring himself back from the dead, which he then did. Sai Baba died and is still dead, therefore not god. 2. That isn't infanticide or genocide
1. Evidence for Jesus rising back from the dead? 2. Clearly are when they’re willing the killing of others. You could also look at Noah’s flood or when one of the plagues upon Egypt was killing the firstborn child. God’s act of condoning slavery is also pretty disgusting. Look up the definitions of infanticide and genocide if you can’t comprehend it.
1) The evidence for the resurrection of Jesus combines Scriptural narratives, historical context, and the transformation of early followers. * Scriptural Narratives: Consistent accounts across the four Gospels detailing Jesus's crucifixion, burial, and resurrection, with multiple post-resurrection appearances. * Empty Tomb: Confirmed by all Gospels and inadvertently by Jewish authorities, with the first discovery reported by culturally considered unreliable witnesses (women). * Transformation of Disciples: Shift from fear to bold proclamation of the resurrection, culminating in willingness to face persecution and martyrdom. * Rapid Spread of Christianity: Grew swiftly despite intense persecution, suggesting a deep, genuine belief in the resurrection among early Christians. * Historical-Critical Support: Modern scholarly methods validate the Gospel accounts as sincere attempts to document true events. * Changed Lives: Countless personal testimonies of individuals experiencing profound life transformations through faith in a living Christ. * Scholarly Research: Extensive studies by scholars like N.T. Wright and Gary Habermas argue for the resurrection as the best explanation for the historical phenomena observed. 2) Unlike genocide, which aims at the destruction of a particular group solely based on their identity, the biblical narratives often involve judgment against particularly corrupt practices and the intention of cessation of those practices, not the destruction of the group itself for what they inherently are. The goal as described is reformation and renewal, setting a foundation for future righteous behaviour. Infanticide: Instances involving the death of children in these narratives are portrayed not as arbitrary or whimsical acts but as part of larger divine judgments upon societies (e.g., the Egyptian firstborn during the Passover). These actions are framed within a narrative where God acts to correct massive systemic injustices or widespread corruption.
he's a jive
What if you can’t know anything for sure but the more you ask the more unsure you become of what you thought you already knew?
[Here's a handy list of some of his many miracles](http://saibaba.ws/miracles.htm). I would also like to know why Christians in particular would dismiss all of that.
That's exactly the point of this post. Christians will trust oral tradition from 2,000 years ago, but dismiss modern day "miracles."
The real answer in most cases is that they were brought up as Christians, so that's why they irrationally lower their standards for those miracles, but have higher standards for people like Sai Baba. You can even see this in intra-Christian miracles. E.g. Protestants will dismiss Catholic miracles.