• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

If God spoke directly to everyone...

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
If people do not want to believe – and I agree that not everyone does – then they can choose not to search. You keep saying that people do not have a choice, and I am not sure what that is all about.

What it's about is that 2 of the 4 rationalizations you made in your OP to explain why your god doesn't just show himself plainly to us are predicated on the notion that belief is a choice. But it isn't a choice.

That is interesting, because what I have found is that most atheists who were raised religious are less interested than the average person, but that is because I talk mostly to atheists who were formerly Christians, and almost invariably they have rejected the whole idea of God and religion. However, since some of them talk about it a lot, I have to wonder if they have really cut all the ties.

Religion, particularly the fundamentalist variety, f*cks up your thinking in a lot of long-lasting ways, even after you stop believing intellectually.

I think that it is within our control because we can choose to search for God or spend our time doing something else. What we end up believing is not in our control because we will only choose what makes sense to us; so for example, I could never believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave because my mind cannot accommodate that belief.

If what we end up believing is not in our control, and what we want to investigate is not in our control, then what are you saying is in our control? We're not responsible for whether or how the process starts, and we're not responsible for what the conclusion of the process is (if it occurs at all), but we're responsible...for the process?

In order to understand where I am coming from on what we can and cannot choose, you can read this short chapter on free will: 70: FREE WILL

Is this another metaphorical teaching, or can I just take this plainly to mean what it says?

He sounds very much like he's trying to have his cake and eat it too.

God being omnipotent has nothing to do with what humans choose to do. Just because God can do anything that does not mean it is God’s responsibility to make anyone believe in Him. Free will is what all human behavior is predicated upon. If God did everything for us we would just be puppets on a string.

Again, "free will" is a misnomer: our will is constrained in a bunch of ways.

As we've discussed before, if your god doesn't care if I believe in him, then I don't care either. If he cares, he has the power to instantly reveal himself to me. If he chooses not to do that, he's responsible for that choice.

God is not hiding anything but His Essence. An omnipotent/omniscient God does not need to make any excuses to humans, for obvious logical reasons.

God hasn't demonstrably done anything, ever. If he exists, and he has the power to demonstrably show himself, but chooses not to, that's called hiding.

I don't see God making excuses. What I see are humans making excuses on behalf of God.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
What it's about is that 2 of the 4 rationalizations you made in your OP to explain why your god doesn't just show himself plainly to us are predicated on the notion that belief is a choice. But it isn't a choice.

I never said that belief was a choice. I said choosing to search is a choice.
Religion, particularly the fundamentalist variety, f*cks up your thinking in a lot of long-lasting ways, even after you stop believing intellectually.
It is difficult for me to understand from experience since I never had that experience, I can only imagine it. It seems like they have some kind of strange hold on you. It sounds pretty awful.
I think that it is within our control because we can choose to search for God or spend our time doing something else. What we end up believing is not in our control because we will only choose what makes sense to us; so for example, I could never believe that Jesus rose bodily from the grave because my mind cannot accommodate that belief.
If what we end up believing is not in our control, and what we want to investigate is not in our control, then what are you saying is in our control? We're not responsible for whether or how the process starts, and we're not responsible for what the conclusion of the process is (if it occurs at all), but we're responsible...for the process?

What we want to investigate is not in our control but people do not always do what they want to do. I do not want to go to work tomorrow but it is in my best interest to go because I have an important meeting and my boss expects me to be there. Likewise, even if someone does not want to search for God they might do it because it is in their best interest.

I am not responsible for not getting to work if I get hit by a car riding my bike to work, and my boss would understand why I did not get there for the meeting. That is outside of my control if I get hit. So I am not responsible for the conclusion of the process, getting to work and going to the meeting, because something happened outside of my control. I am only responsible to try to make it to work.

If people want to know if God exists then they are only responsible to make an attempt to find out. If they do not want to do that, there might be consequences just like there might be consequences for me if I do not want to go to work and decide to stay in bed. I cannot say what either consequence would be.
Is this another metaphorical teaching, or can I just take this plainly to mean what it says?

He sounds very much like he's trying to have his cake and eat it too.
I think it is easy to understand and it means what it says. What do you mean, trying to have his cake and eat it too?
Again, "free will" is a misnomer: our will is constrained in a bunch of ways.
I agree it is constrained in many ways, but not completely.
As we've discussed before, if your god doesn't care if I believe in him, then I don't care either. If he cares, he has the power to instantly reveal himself to me. If he chooses not to do that, he's responsible for that choice.
I have been down this road before. I cannot say God does not care because I do not KNOW if God cares. All I can know is what Baha’u’llah revealed and from that I draw some conclusions. In short, God cares that we believe in Him but only for our benefit, not for His benefit. God has no needs so God does not need us to believe He exists. God wants us to believe that but only for our own benefit.

Baha’u’llah wrote that God could have made all men one people, believers. He did not specify the method God would use and that does not matter. The point is that God could have done that if He wanted to. The passage goes on to say why God didn’t want to make us believers... In short, God wants us to do our own homework and become believers by our own efforts. According to this passage, God wants everyone to search for Him and determine if He exists by using their own innate intelligence and making a sincere effort.
God hasn't demonstrably done anything, ever. If he exists, and he has the power to demonstrably show himself, but chooses not to, that's called hiding.
God has done nothing that YOU can see but that does not mean God has never done anything. You just think you would want God to show Himself because you do not know what would happen. I will leave you with a short quote that explains what would happen if God revealed His full Essence to man:

“Were the Eternal Essence to manifest all that is latent within Him, were He to shine in the plentitude of His glory, none would be found to question His power or repudiate His truth. Nay, all created things would be so dazzled and thunderstruck by the evidences of His light as to be reduced to utter nothingness.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 71-72

I do not think I would want to be around if that happened.
I don't see God making excuses. What I see are humans making excuses on behalf of God.
Believers are not making excuses for God because an infallible God cannot need excuses since He cannot make any mistakes.

Believers are just explaining what God does according to scriptures. The reason you think God needs excuses is because God is not doing what you want Him to do and you think God should do something differently; but any God that took marching orders from humans would not be omnipotent and any God that did not know the best way to communicate would not be omniscient.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
and having posted as if I HAVE Guidance......

will I not be held accountable?

here in this life I post with only a photo for ID

in the next life.....God and heaven will see my thoughts and feelings
without this veil of flesh

oh oh
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
Good point Bob... I don't know, but neither do you. ;)

Of course I do not-- but-- I can make an educated guess, based on what people do.

Once you reach self-awareness? Intelligence begins to fall into classes of behavior-- we know many animals on earth are quite self-aware, and are therefore intelligent. In our arrogance, we like to pretend that humans are the most intelligent-- but we cannot prove that, can we?

Many humans point to our creation of digital watches, as one proof of our superior intelligence. Whereas some wise folk, point to dolphins, who may well be as smart, or smarter than us, but have never been even slightly interested in watches of any sort--digital or otherwise. From their perspective, not having invented them, shows they are superior to us. Who gets to say?

In any case? If there is a god? It's #1 trait is one of SUCCESSFUL HIDING. And that is not a good trait to have in an Infinitely Powerful Being.

But it is one CERTAIN trait that all gods MUST have-- for it's evident by observation.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
It is not God's job to correct the situation, it is humans' job..

Says you-- do you expect a toddler to put out a forest fire that endangers the whole continent? No? That would be the job of Expert Fire Fighters, yes?

Your god-- if it exists-- is either lazy, or maliciously indifferent. No two ways about that.
Not God's job, our job.

Citation needed: Evidence Missing 401.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
and your god knows your thoughts?
and would be willing to override and reboot the next gesture of your hand?


By definition? All Knowing means yes-- knowing the thoughts of everyone. It kinda goes with the LABEL here.

And all powerful? Yeah... that means no free will... to exercise free will, the future-- where choices are possible-- has to be unknown.

If the future is already written out? Choice becomes impossible, and everything is like a clockwork, slowly winding down the fixed paths to the pre-determined end.

So. Either god is not all knowing, and not god? Or?

PS. I have no gods of any stripe. I consider gods to be a bad place-holder for all those "we have no frakking CLUE" questions. Sadly, lots of people refuse to accept "we don't know".
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
If you think of living standards as morality then yes people do have more fancy houses and are richer from money, but that is not morality to me.

With all due respect, where the heck did you get the idea that my definition of morality has anything to do with people having fancy houses or get richer from money? I talked about people no longer being owned as property. I spoke about people being judged on what they can do and not on what there sex is, their skin color is, or who they're sexually attracted to, so that they have the same rights to vote, drive cars, own property, and do all of the things that other people in a free society are allowed to do. ALL of which deal with TRUTHFULNESS , COMPASSION, and FORBEARANCE.

How is abolishing slavery and allowing women to have equal rights NOT good morals, seen from a spiritual being?
The hardships we go through is because of our karma, so those people you speak of who did go through a lot of difficulties, suffering and so on is repayment of their own karma, what people today seek is good living happiness all the time, if they feel sick they take a million different medicines, people are jealous on each other. some people do crime to get rich because then they get a higher status. All of that is actually within lack of morality when you see it from spiritual practitioners, who have no interests in money, fame, Luxourioues living and so on.

A story from a long time ago says that there was a man who carried around a rock because it was all he needed and it was a symbol of his renunciation of the worldly living. The only thing he was seeking was spiritual wisdom. He knew there are suffering in the world, but it is suffering for a reason. we all suffer from time to time because of our repayment of karma. But that is not a bad thing to suffer for.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
In any case? If there is a god? It's #1 trait is one of SUCCESSFUL HIDING. And that is not a good trait to have in an Infinitely Powerful Being.
I will give you that Bob, except I think that hiding is a good trait to have in an Infinitely Powerful Being.
That is because you would not want to SEE what would happen if God came OUT of hiding.
But it is one CERTAIN trait that all gods MUST have-- for it's evident by observation.
True.
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
PS. I have no gods of any stripe. I consider gods to be a bad place-holder for all those "we have no frakking CLUE" questions. Sadly, lots of people refuse to accept "we don't know".
my take on the situation is not like yours

7billion+ copies of a learning device
and all copies end in dust?
not buying that

and where is the fascination of all this life?
if the Maker already knows how you will turn out

so....similar to Star Trek fame
heaven anides by a Prime Directive
no 'touchie....no feelie'

and just like the tv series.....there is intervention
lesser forms need a 'boot'
now and then
 
Top