• 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!

Would/Should God communicate directly to everyone in the world?

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
a prophet speaks of God
it is believed some prophets speak FOR God

but either way.....the info comes down somehow

and God has never spoken?......not to anyone?
God HAS spoken, but not to everyone, only to the Prophets God CHOSE to speak to.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You ask "if God is omnipotent," but you don't mention "omniscient," for some reason -- though I understand that to be part of the job description.
Yes it is part of the job description, and that means that God knows everything which means that God knows the best way to communicate to humans, from all the available options.
If God is omniscient, then God knows that communicating to one or a few with the purpose of getting the message to many is fraught with problems, and as all human history has demonstrated clearly (which is why an omniscient being should know it!) gets garbled.
But that is not a God problem, it is a human problem, and since humans have a rational mind and free will God wants them to figure the message out.
If I want to deliver an important message to an employee of mine, I deliver that message myself, in person -- so that the employee has full access to not only the message itself, from my lips, but also to my body language, tone of voice and all the rest that we humans depend on so completely to truly understand one another.
God is not a person, so God cannot deliver the message in person. That is one reason God used a Messenger, but the other reason is that nobody could ever understand direct communication from God unless they had a dual nature, divine and human. Messengers have both natures so they can bridge the gap in understanding between God and man.
If God is omnipotent (which is a word implying "infinite") than it is no more difficult to have the same communication to over 7 billion than it is to have it with only one or a few.
Hypothetically that is true, but just because it would be no more difficult for God does not mean it would be the best way for humans to receive the message. The limitations are human limitations, not God limitations.
And finally, if the message is important -- if it is really something that God wants humanity to know -- then to communicate it in a way already known (and shown) to be error-prone to the point of failing to get the message across, makes the God a very poor communicator.
It is the humans who make the errors, not God. Humans will always make errors because humans are fallible. There is no reason to think that they would not misinterpret what God said to them, if it was even possible for them to understand God.

Granted, the Bible is not easy to understand so there is a lot of room for misinterpretation, but this is a new age and we have a new revelation from God through Baha'u'llah that is easy to understand. The problem is that most people do not recognize it as revelation yet, because they are still looking at the Bible as the only valid revelation from God.
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
What is wrong with having stuff written down, if it is clearly written and easy to understand?
One of the issues with writing down stuff, especially at the time where it were done, is that these texts are lost. And thereby the teachings, the stories were original shared orally and first later written down. Secondly the teachings were written down in a language that only few people spoke in comparison to the amount of people living at the time. So I don't see how it can be argued that this was done to make it clear to everyone.

If the teachings had been revealed at the same time, independent of each other to all people then that would have made a lot stronger argument I think.

Nobody could ever understand God if God spoke to them directly because there is too big of a chasm between God and man, and that is why God uses Messengers who act as intermediaries; since they have a divine mind and they are also human they can bridge the gap.
I think this is assuming something for which there is no reason for. There is nothing especially difficult to understand about God and what he have done or created, would he choose to explain it. This, at least to me, are not complicated in any way and would be easily understood by humans.

Basically what God would have to explain is the following, which would be enough for us to understand his motives:

1. Have God always existed?
2. What is the purpose of us, in a Universe as big as it is, basically why did he create us in the first place?
3. Why doesn't he just get rid of evil?
4. What is the purpose of us living on Earth, if he want us to come live in a new world?
5. What is the point of sins?

The only reason, no one can answer these questions is because there is no good explanation to find anywhere in the scriptures. But understanding God's reason for it being like that, is not more complicated than so many other things. To me its like saying that we just can't understand the Big bang because its to complicated. Yet im fairly certain that if God or some other being which knew how it worked, came and explained it to us, that it would be rather logical and not at all difficult to understand.

So again the only reason we don't, is because God have not cared to explain himself. Which is then used as an excuse to say that its because we wouldn't understand it. To me that is a false assumption.

Even if we could understand God directly, God revealing the truth to everyone would not accomplish God’s objectives. God wants us to search for the truth, and if we find it we can choose to accept or reject God’s teachings and laws because we have free will.
I think, I asked you this in the other long discussion we had as well, or maybe it was one of the other people :) But anyway Ill do it again. The excuse of free will doesn't work as far as I see it.

The reason being. If humans were created with free will, then that would cause a conflict with the idea prophecies. As you have mentioned before, you believe that it was prophesied that Baha'u'llah would comes as it is said in the bible. Yet the question is, that if we have free will, could anyone prevent Baha'u'llah? Lets say, would it be possible for someone to have killed his great grandparents, so he would never have been born?

To me, free will and the idea of prophecies does not go hand in hand, they are in conflict with each other and one prevent the other from being true,

So saying that God wants us to seek the truth, makes little sense if prophecies are possible, because the truth have already been determined by God and therefore little reason for having us wasting time seeking or finding it out.

If we take this even further, it would also not be possible for someone to choose whether or not they want to accept or reject God teachings or laws. Because assuming everyone did reject them, none would have cared to write them down and therefore the prophecies wouldn't have been possible either. For the prophecies to come true, things have to go according to what God have already decided, leaving no room for free will.

God wants us to work for what we get and study what He reveals, not just have it given to us for free.
Exactly the same answer as above.

Moreover, we are all capable of understanding God’s teachings because we all have a rational mind.
This is confirming what I wrote in the start of this reply, that if God explained it to us, we would understand it, right? :)
 
Last edited:

Shad

Veteran Member
nay

God either spoke.....or He did not

I suspect.....strongly

God speaks to one and allows the info to go from there
on purpose

that leaves YOU to decide what you accept and dismiss

Easily done due to lack of evidence.

as you have stated.....your point
YOUR point
breaks down

Nope. You are still making the same mistake that your suspicion is correct then arguing from that point.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I meant that some atheists want God to communicate to them directly so they won’t have to *do anything* but listen to God talk to them and then they will know God exists and what message He has for them. They do not want to have to look for the Messenger of God or look at what He wrote.
How many atheists haven't tried and even belonged to some religion? They heard. They listened and rejected it. And, if we are talking about Christians and what their Scriptures teach, then what you have read and heard about that God, you reject.

If the Christian God is real and he communicates, we are all doomed. if he communicates,we will be forced to obey him.
Exactly, what does the Christian Scriptures say? It's all about anyone not following and believing in Jesus, in the way taught in their Scriptures, is doomed to hell along with the devil and his angels. But, Baha'is don't believe in the Christian hell and the devil. So what is taught in the Christian Scriptures is wrong and misleading... if the Baha'is are correct. If the Christians are correct, we are all, including Baha'is, are in trouble.

The Christian God invented by the Church might be very foreboding, but the God of Jesus is a different God.
The God of Jesus? The same God that allegedly blew up Sodom and Gomorrah? That ordered the Israelites to kill all the women and children in Jericho? The God that drowned everyone in a world-wide flood? And, I know you haven't read Revelation, but yet you think you know enough without reading it... but God in Revelations pours out his wrath on an unbelieving world. So that God is still rather foreboding.

a prophet speaks of God
it is believed some prophets speak FOR God
Baha'is claim God only speaks through "messengers" or, what they call "manifestations". To accommodate the people like Jewish prophets, they have another special category. But the Bible is filled with those lesser prophets. Where are they today? Do all religions have these prophets that do get messages from God? Are there some in the Baha'i Faith?
And finally, if the message is important -- if it is really something that God wants humanity to know -- then to communicate it in a way already known (and shown) to be error-prone to the point of failing to get the message across, makes the God a very poor communicator.
To some people, not to Baha'is though, the mixed messages from the different religions don't have to be all from the God of the Baha'is. But, since Baha'is believe in all these different religions, they have to come up with a reason why all the religions are different. Having the messages written down is their excuse. But they use it to confirm that God is consistent with his message. He, through his messenger, delivered it correctly and true, but people took those "original" messages and mixed in false traditions and things and got them all screwed up. And God didn't know that would happen? God didn't know that his "original" messages would all get misinterpreted? Yet, he still kept sending messengers and had the messages written down? And most of the time, written down by others and not the messenger?

What is wrong with having stuff written down, if it is clearly written and easy to understand?
You read the Bible. Is it easy to understand? How about the Quran? To some of us, with all the flowery language, Baha'u'llah's writing aren't all that clear and easy to understand.

But that is not a God problem, it is a human problem, and since humans have a rational mind and free will God wants them to figure the message out.
Okay, I use this question for Baha'is all the time. During the Inquisition, should a Jew have renounced their religion and become a Christian? Which religion was more right? Or, which religion had less false beliefs mixed into it? Was that Jewish person being tortured supposed to convert to the newer religion? The religion that had a newer message from God? A religion that believed in Satan and hell, that Jesus rose from the dead and was part of a trinitarian God? Or, stay a Jew and be killed? Rational and free will? The Jew had been taught all his life to believe in the God of Israel, but, I doubt Baha'is believe that all those things he was taught are true. Or, should he dump all those beliefs and join Christianity? A religion that Baha'is say has added a lot of false beliefs into it? Or, maybe they were both supposed to dump their religions and join Islam? Except how true was Islam to the "original" teachings in those days. What is the "rational" choice?

There is nothing especially difficult to understand about God and what he have done or created, would he choose to explain it.
Yes, the gods of different people and cultures has explained everything. But we call those thing myth. Unless you are a Bible believing Christian that takes the whole Bible literally, then you believe everything has been explained. God created everything in 6 days. He wanted the Hebrews to obey His laws. Then, he changed his mind and wanted everyone to follow His Son Jesus. If you're a Baha'i you believe everything in all the major religions is true, except the things that got added in by evil, corrupt religious leaders or was misinterpreted. But, not to worry, Baha'u'llah has made God's wishes perfectly clear.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
God HAS spoken, but not to everyone, only to the Prophets God CHOSE to speak to.
Daniel 4:31 "While the word was in the king's mouth, a voice came from heaven, saying, 'King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is declared: sovereignty has been removed from you,

Matthew 3:17 and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."

Mark 1:11 and a voice came out of the heavens: "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."

Luke 3:22 and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."

John 12:28-30 "Father, glorify Your name " Then a voice came out of heaven: "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again." So the crowd of people who stood by and heard it were saying that it had thundered; others were saying, "An angel has spoken to Him." Jesus answered and said, "This voice has not come for My sake, but for your sakes.

2 Peter 1:18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
So again you make up things that fits into your Baha'i beliefs and disregard as untrue or misinterpreted or as meant to be only symbolic the things from other religions. So, naturally, you, the Baha'i are always right. How can anyone argue or debate against that?

Another question, The Buddha and his enlightenment. Was he special. Was he a "manifestation" of God being both human and divine? Or, was he just human and found a path to enlightenment that could be taught to others so they too could become enlightened?
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Okay, but meanwhile I wish you would come to my forum and talk some sense into two atheist posters who think God should communicate with everyone in the world directly, just because God is omnipotent, so hypothetically God could do it. The poor God needs excuses for not doing what they expect Him to do.. :rolleyes:

I hope you do not mind that I quoted you to them, identifying you as the *rational atheist.* :)
I doubt it will turn the tide but it was worth a try.

Well, if there was a god, I don't think he would be obligated to communicate his existence to everyone. But then those whom he does not clearly reveal his existence to should not be obligated to believe he exists, and should not suffer negative consequences for the god's refusal to communicate.

I have never heard an atheist that said that a god would be obligated to speak to everyone (or in othe rwords, reveal himself). But I have heard and agree that if a god wants someone to believe he exists, then the god knows what that person requires for belief and if that is not provided, then belief should not be expected. Perhaps that is what they are saying?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said: God HAS spoken, but not to everyone, only to the Prophets God CHOSE to speak to.

Daniel 4:31 "While the word was in the king's mouth, a voice came from heaven, saying, 'King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is declared: sovereignty has been removed from you,

Matthew 3:17 and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased."

Mark 1:11 and a voice came out of the heavens: "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."

Luke 3:22 and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him in bodily form like a dove, and a voice came out of heaven, "You are My beloved Son, in You I am well-pleased."

John 12:28-30 "Father, glorify Your name " Then a voice came out of heaven: "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again." So the crowd of people who stood by and heard it were saying that it had thundered; others were saying, "An angel has spoken to Him." Jesus answered and said, "This voice has not come for My sake, but for your sakes.

2 Peter 1:18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
So again you make up things that fits into your Baha'i beliefs and disregard as untrue or misinterpreted or as meant to be only symbolic the things from other religions. So, naturally, you, the Baha'i are always right. How can anyone argue or debate against that?
The context of my answer was that God does not communicate to everyone, only to those who He chooses to communicate to, which are prophets and Manifestations of God. I did not say anything about anything being untrue or misinterpreted or as meant to be only symbolic.
Another question, The Buddha and his enlightenment. Was he special. Was he a "manifestation" of God being both human and divine? Or, was he just human and found a path to enlightenment that could be taught to others so they too could become enlightened?
It is a Baha'i belief that the Buddha was a Manifestation of God, so as such He would have had to be both human and divine, not just an ordinary human who found a path to enlightenment.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Baha'is claim God only speaks through "messengers" or, what they call "manifestations". To accommodate the people like Jewish prophets, they have another special category. But the Bible is filled with those lesser prophets. Where are they today? Do all religions have these prophets that do get messages from God? Are there some in the Baha'i Faith?
I do not rightly know about the other religions but there are none in the Baha'i Faith.
To some people, not to Baha'is though, the mixed messages from the different religions don't have to be all from the God of the Baha'is. But, since Baha'is believe in all these different religions, they have to come up with a reason why all the religions are different. Having the messages written down is their excuse. But they use it to confirm that God is consistent with his message. He, through his messenger, delivered it correctly and true, but people took those "original" messages and mixed in false traditions and things and got them all screwed up. And God didn't know that would happen? God didn't know that his "original" messages would all get misinterpreted? Yet, he still kept sending messengers and had the messages written down? And most of the time, written down by others and not the messenger?
Of course God knew all that would happen because God is omniscient, but apparently it was not and issue for God because an omnipotent God would not have allowed it if it was an issue. God allows people to make their own free will choices and allows for history to unfold. Obviously, God knew he would be sending Baha'u'llah to straighten things out, but not until the appointed time.

I cannot say why God did what He did in the past, having those who were not Messengers write scriptures. I can only guess that the people of former ages were not yet ready, not spiritually evolved enough to receive a revelation directly from God written by the Manifestation of God (Messenger). Humanity is now capable of having such a revelation but most people are stuck in the past, attached to their older religions, so they have not recognized Baha'u'llah yet. That will change eventually, it's early yet.
You read the Bible. Is it easy to understand? How about the Quran? To some of us, with all the flowery language, Baha'u'llah's writing aren't all that clear and easy to understand.
I never understood the Writings of Baha'u'llah back when I first became a Baha'i, but I had the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha which are easy to understand. Now I do understand the Writings of Baha'u'llah, most of them.
Okay, I use this question for Baha'is all the time. During the Inquisition, should a Jew have renounced their religion and become a Christian? Which religion was more right? Or, which religion had less false beliefs mixed into it? Was that Jewish person being tortured supposed to convert to the newer religion? The religion that had a newer message from God? A religion that believed in Satan and hell, that Jesus rose from the dead and was part of a trinitarian God? Or, stay a Jew and be killed? Rational and free will? The Jew had been taught all his life to believe in the God of Israel, but, I doubt Baha'is believe that all those things he was taught are true. Or, should he dump all those beliefs and join Christianity? A religion that Baha'is say has added a lot of false beliefs into it? Or, maybe they were both supposed to dump their religions and join Islam? Except how true was Islam to the "original" teachings in those days. What is the "rational" choice?
All I can say is what Baha'u'llah said, the Jews should have recognized Jesus. I do not think they should have embraced Christianity because it was a false religion.

"These people of Israel are even unto the present day still expecting that Manifestation which the Bible hath foretold! How many Manifestations of Holiness, how many Revealers of the light everlasting, have appeared since the time of Moses, and yet Israel, wrapt in the densest veils of satanic fancy and false imaginings, is still expectant that the idol of her own handiwork will appear with such signs as she herself hath conceived! Thus hath God laid hold of them for their sins, hath extinguished in them the spirit of faith, and tormented them with the flames of the nethermost fire. And this for no other reason except that Israel refused to apprehend the meaning of such words as have been revealed in the Bible concerning the signs of the coming Revelation. As she never grasped their true significance, and, to outward seeming, such events never came to pass, she, therefore, remained deprived of recognizing the beauty of Jesus and of beholding the Face of God. And they still await His coming! From time immemorial even unto this day, all the kindreds and peoples of the earth have clung to such fanciful and unseemly thoughts, and thus have deprived themselves of the clear waters streaming from the springs of purity and holiness...”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 20-21

Yes, the gods of different people and cultures has explained everything. But we call those thing myth. Unless you are a Bible believing Christian that takes the whole Bible literally, then you believe everything has been explained. God created everything in 6 days. He wanted the Hebrews to obey His laws. Then, he changed his mind and wanted everyone to follow His Son Jesus. If you're a Baha'i you believe everything in all the major religions is true, except the things that got added in by evil, corrupt religious leaders or was misinterpreted. But, not to worry, Baha'u'llah has made God's wishes perfectly clear.
:D
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Well, if there was a god, I don't think he would be obligated to communicate his existence to everyone. But then those whom he does not clearly reveal his existence to should not be obligated to believe he exists, and should not suffer negative consequences for the god's refusal to communicate.
When you say he does not clearly reveal his existence, what exactly do you mean? Do you mean communicating directly to you or do you mean showing up and saying hi?

When you say god's refusal to communicate, do you mean God communicating to you directly and saying "I am God?"

I do not think they are obligated or will suffer negative consequences but I am not God so I cannot really say what will happen.
I have never heard an atheist that said that a god would be obligated to speak to everyone (or in other words, reveal himself).
Well, there is one, and I have been conversing with him on my forum for over five years. I told him that other atheists do not think like him, but he does not seem to care, or he does not believe me. He is not giving up his position that if a god exists it would/should communicate to everyone in the world, rather than using Messengers to communicate.
But I have heard and agree that if a god wants someone to believe he exists, then the god knows what that person requires for belief and if that is not provided, then belief should not be expected. Perhaps that is what they are saying?
Yes, the omniscient God knows what it would require to get atheists to believe He exists. The hundred-dollar question is whether God is obligated to give them what they require or whether they should simply accept what God has already provided.

I cannot say what God expects people to do when they do not get the evidence they require. I do not think they will know till after they die what God expected, if anything. Imo, they will simply suffer the consequences of their non-belief, but I am not sure exactly what those consequences will be. One thing is certain: As long as we live in this world and have free will we can choose to believe or disbelieve whatever we want to and God does not interfere with that choice, unless solicited.
 
Last edited:

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
When you say he does not clearly reveal his existence, what exactly do you mean? Do you mean communicating directly to you or do you mean showing up and saying hi?

I mean that it is obvious that not every person in the world has been provided with sufficient evidence of the existence of your god. What would constitute sufficient evidence would depend upon the person, and an omniscient god would know what evidence is required by each person. If said god chose not to provide the needed evidence, then the individual person should not be held accountable.

When you say god's refusal to communicate, do you mean God communicating to you directly and saying "I am God?"

See above response.

I do not think they are obligated or will suffer negative consequences but I am not God so I cannot really say what will happen.

That is your opinion and the opinion of others varies. The fact that it cannot be determined definitively poses yet another delimma.

Well, there is one, and I have been conversing with him on my forum for over five years. I told him that other atheists do not think like him, but he does not seem to care, or he does not believe me. He is not giving up his position that if a god exists it would/should communicate to everyone in the world, rather than using Messengers to communicate.

Since atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in a god, you will come across all sorts of opinions on other things. A god should/would communicate only if the god desired to do so. So I disagree with him on that point. Since neither of us actually believe a god exists, though, it's a distinction without a difference, I guess.

Yes, the omniscient God knows what it would require to get atheists to believe He exists. The hundred-dollar question is whether God is obligated to give them what they require or whether they should simply accept what God has already provided.

I cannot speak to what a potential god would be obligated to do or not do. How could I or anyone know what that would be?

I cannot say what God expects people to do when they do not get the evidence they require. I do not think they will know till after they die what God expected, if anything. Imo, they will simply suffer the consequences of their non-belief, but I am not sure exactly what those consequences will be. One thing is certain: As long as we live in this world and have free will we can choose to believe or disbelieve whatever we want to and God does not interfere with that choice, unless solicited.

That is one of the problems with the Christian religion (or most versions of it). You cannot be "saved" unless you believe. You may not even be Christian, so that may not apply to you. I was speaking generally.


Apologies for the unusual way of responding. Never got the hang of the quote system on here. Nice to go through the subject with you, though. No hysterics or hyperbole.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
@Milton Platt

Trailblazer said: When you say he does not clearly reveal his existence, what exactly do you mean? Do you mean communicating directly to you or do you mean showing up and saying hi?

Milton said: I mean that it is obvious that not every person in the world has been provided with sufficient evidence of the existence of your god.

That is true. Not everyone in the world has been provided with evidence that is *sufficient for them* to believe in God. If they had all been provided with that, everyone would believe in God.

What would constitute sufficient evidence would depend upon the person, and an omniscient god would know what evidence is required by each person.

Yes, God would know because God knows everything.

If said god chose not to provide the needed evidence, then the individual person should not be held accountable.

This is where we get into a gray area. If God provided evidence that God considers sufficient for everyone to believe, why would God have to cater to every individual in the world?
I cannot say if God holds nonbelievers accountable, they will only know that after they die.

I do not think they are obligated or will suffer negative consequences but I am not God so I cannot really say what will happen.

That is your opinion and the opinion of others varies. The fact that it cannot be determined definitively poses yet another dilemma.

It does pose a dilemma because it puts atheists in an awkward position since they cannot *just believe* in God if they do not see what believers see as evidence for God. However, there is a certain risk involved if they do not believe in God.

Well, there is one, and I have been conversing with him on my forum for over five years. I told him that other atheists do not think like him, but he does not seem to care, or he does not believe me. He is not giving up his position that if a god exists it would/should communicate to everyone in the world, rather than using Messengers to communicate.

Since atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in a god, you will come across all sorts of opinions on other things. A god should/would communicate only if the god desired to do so. So I disagree with him on that point. Since neither of us actually believe a god exists, though, it's a distinction without a difference, I guess.

I think there is a big difference because he is essentially dictating to God how God should communicate (directly) and to whom (everyone), and that is arrogant. All you are saying is that God would know what it would take and you leave the decision to God, and it should be God’s decision because it is God who is providing the evidence of His existence.

Yes, the omniscient God knows what it would require to get atheists to believe He exists. The hundred-dollar question is whether God is obligated to give them what they require or whether they should simply accept what God has already provided.

I cannot speak to what a potential god would be obligated to do or not do. How could I or anyone know what that would be?

That is a really good answer. How could you know anything about God and what He would be obligated to do or not do? All you could have is a personal opinion but it shows humility when you withhold that, since such an opinion could only be based upon what you might expect of God.

I cannot say what God expects people to do when they do not get the evidence they require. I do not think they will know till after they die what God expected, if anything. Imo, they will simply suffer the consequences of their non-belief, but I am not sure exactly what those consequences will be. One thing is certain: As long as we live in this world and have free will we can choose to believe or disbelieve whatever we want to and God does not interfere with that choice, unless solicited.

That is one of the problems with the Christian religion (or most versions of it). You cannot be "saved" unless you believe. You may not even be Christian, so that may not apply to you. I was speaking generally.

Christianity does not make any sense if God is, as Christians claim, All-Loving and benevolent. I do not think that Jesus ever meant that those who did not believe in Him would not be “saved.” Saved is an invention of the Church which is based upon the false doctrine of original sin. Otherwise there would be nothing to be saved from. It would be just a matter of gaining eternal life, and that is what Jesus actually said, that we would gain eternal life by believing in Him. But that does not mean everyone else would go to hell.

According to my Baha’i beliefs all souls continue to exist after the physical body dies, their body just changed form, into a spiritual body. The difference between believers and nonbelievers is that believers will have eternal life, which means nearness to God, and nonbelievers will not have eternal life because they will be distant from God. But nonbelievers will continue to exist forever in the spiritual world. The question is whether they will be able to get near to God after they die, and I think that will only be possible by the prayers of others and the mercy of God, according to my beliefs.

I do not think all atheists will be in the same position but rather it will depend upon the *reasons* why they did not believe. Those who made a sincere effort to believe based upon the evidence God provided, but still could not believe, will be in a different position than those who made no effort at all and even thumbed their nose at God and made demands upon God.

I believe that the Messenger of God that comes in every age is the evidence of God’s existence. Just as Christians believe it is vital to recognize Jesus in order to enter the Kingdom of God, it is a Baha’i belief that it is vital to recognize Baha’u’llah. There is a certain responsibility that comes with *knowledge* of the Messenger of God for any given age. Obviously, almost everyone in the world now knows about Jesus but many people do not know about Baha’u’llah. Those who did not know about Baha’u’llah will not be held accountable as long as they followed the rules of conduct as laid down by Jesus and always walked in the straight path.

“Then as to what thou hast asked me for pious people who died before they heard the Voice of this Manifestation. Listen: Those who have mounted to God before hearing the Voice, if they followed the rules of conduct as laid down by Jesus and always walked in the straight path, they have obtained this Dazzling Light after their rising to the Kingdom of God. I pray God to lift the veil for thee and to corroborate by the spirit of experience, so that all may be evident to thee, by the Holy Spirit of God.” ('Abdu'l-Bahá, Tablets of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 478)

“Those who have never had any opportunity of hearing of the Faith but who lived good lives will no doubt be treated with the greatest love and mercy in the next world and reap their full reward.” (Directives from the Guardian, no. 108, p. 40)​

Another thing is very important is that only God knows what anyone’s *capacity* to believe is, I do not know. So someone I might think had the capacity might not have had it, and vice versa. That is why I do not think it is my place to judge anyone. I do get annoyed with some people like that atheist I mentioned because I think he has had so much opportunity to believe, but only God knows what he is up against, I don’t know his mind or his life experiences. I was just lucky how I came to believe in God and I do not even think I deserved what I got because I was not even searching for God, but since God is the one who guides us to belief in Him, God must have had a reason.

Apologies for the unusual way of responding. Never got the hang of the quote system on here. Nice to go through the subject with you, though. No hysterics or hyperbole.

Actually I prefer this method and this is the method we use on the other forum I post on, which is my forum. Those quotes take a lot longer.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Christianity does not make any sense if God is, as Christians claim, All-Loving and benevolent. I do not think that Jesus ever meant that those who did not believe in Him would not be “saved.” Saved is an invention of the Church which is based upon the false doctrine of original sin. Otherwise there would be nothing to be saved from. It would be just a matter of gaining eternal life, and that is what Jesus actually said, that we would gain eternal life by believing in Him. But that does not mean everyone else would go to hell.
In Romans, Paul builds the case for people being sinful pieces of %$&#. Contrast that with Baha'is saying that we were created "noble". But, because we are all no good worthless sinners and can't possibly do anything that could pay the penalty for our sins, God sent his only son as a sacrifice.
Romans 3
9Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. 10 As it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one... 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law... 22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25 God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood—to be received by faith.​
You must love it that it says "glory of God in verse 23, but besides that, this is only one place where Christians come up with needing Jesus to be saved. It is directly taught in the NT. And most Baha'is say they believe in what the NT says. But do they? No. Baha'is can nullify anything they want to by saying that the Baha'i Faith does not see the NT as completely "authentic".

"Original Sin"? Maybe the Church made the doctrine worse, but it was there in the NT.
Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—​

That one that Paul is talking about is Adam. So all we have to do is believe God created the world and put Adam and Eve in a garden that had a tree with forbidden fruit on it. Then, that a talking serpent came along and talked Eve into taking a bite of the forbidden fruit and she gave some to Adam. They got cursed. Sin and death came into the world. And several thousands of years later God provided the remedy for that first sin that tainted all of humanity by sending Jesus to pay the penalty for us. And, all we have to do is accept his sacrifice by believing in him. Too simple.

But, did the Church make this &^*% up? No, it's straight from the NT. Is the NT the truth or not? Hopefully not. Yet some Baha'is have to support it. Why would Jews leave their beliefs for this? Was this ever... really the way it is? Is this really all from God? Was this really what God thought was the best thing to do? To create humans, let them fall and commit sin, curse them, send fire and brimstone from the sky to kill the worst of them, cause a flood to drown almost all of them, give them laws through Moses that they were expected to obey, but according to Paul, they couldn't never live up to obeying the laws... and besides, the law, he says could never "save" them... then after all this he sends Jesus.

Please don't tell me Baha'is really believe this is part of the "progressive" revelation from the one true God. If it sounds like myth, maybe it just might be myth. So why would any thinking person believe in a mythical religion and their mythical God?

But, that's not my point. My point is that Christians built their doctrine based on the %&%^ stated in the NT. Don't blame them. It's God's fault for misleading them into thinking it was his truth. But, definitely don't blame people that believe the God of the Bible is not real... and I don't think you do. The next question is... Is the God of the Baha'i Faith real? After all, that God is supposed to be the same God of the Bible.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
One of the issues with writing down stuff, especially at the time where it were done, is that these texts are lost. And thereby the teachings, the stories were original shared orally and first later written down. Secondly the teachings were written down in a language that only few people spoke in comparison to the amount of people living at the time. So I don't see how it can be argued that this was done to make it clear to everyone.

I assume you are referring to the Bible. Why do you assume that God wanted to make it clear to everyone? Maybe there was a reason why God did not care if it was clear to everyone or maybe God wanted to leave it to everyone to figure it out as best they could, knowing that in the future it would be explained so everyone could understand it.
If the teachings had been revealed at the same time, independent of each other to all people then that would have made a lot stronger argument I think.
I assume you are referring to the Bible. How would it be possible to reveal ALL the teachings in the Bible to every single person in the world living back when the Bible was written, and how would people remember all those? How could they write all that down? Then what would happen to all the people who were born after that? Would God reveal the equivalent of what is in the Bible to everyone who was born after that?
I think this is assuming something for which there is no reason for. There is nothing especially difficult to understand about God and what he have done or created, would he choose to explain it.
Why isn’t it okay for God to explain it to a Messenger who writes it in scriptures, after which time we can read what He wrote? Why should God explain it to each and every human being in the world?
This, at least to me, are not complicated in any way and would be easily understood by humans.

It is not a matter of whether there is a reason for it or not. People are either capable of understanding God speaking to them directly or they are not. This of course depends upon the nature of God and the nature of humans, how the human brain was created.
Basically what God would have to explain is the following, which would be enough for us to understand his motives:

1. Have God always existed?
2. What is the purpose of us, in a Universe as big as it is, basically why did he create us in the first place?
3. Why doesn't he just get rid of evil?
4. What is the purpose of us living on Earth, if he want us to come live in a new world?
5. What is the point of sins?

The only reason, no one can answer these questions is because there is no good explanation to find anywhere in the scriptures. But understanding God's reason for it being like that, is not more complicated than so many other things. To me its like saying that we just can't understand the Big bang because its to complicated. Yet im fairly certain that if God or some other being which knew how it worked, came and explained it to us, that it would be rather logical and not at all difficult to understand.

So again the only reason we don't, is because God have not cared to explain himself. Which is then used as an excuse to say that its because we wouldn't understand it. To me that is a false assumption.

The answers to those questions have been explained in scriptures, so why would God need to explain the same thing to each and every human being in the world? If you cannot find the answers in the Bible, you can find them in the Baha’i Writings.
I think, I asked you this in the other long discussion we had as well, or maybe it was one of the other people
C:\Users\Home\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.gif
But anyway Ill do it again. The excuse of free will doesn't work as far as I see it.

The reason being. If humans were created with free will, then that would cause a conflict with the idea prophecies. As you have mentioned before, you believe that it was prophesied that Baha'u'llah would comes as it is said in the bible. Yet the question is, that if we have free will, could anyone prevent Baha'u'llah? Lets say, would it be possible for someone to have killed his great grandparents, so he would never have been born?

To me, free will and the idea of prophecies does not go hand in hand, they are in conflict with each other and one prevent the other from being true,
I do not remember us talking about that. I do not see how those are in conflict. If God ordained Baha’u’llah or Jesus or any Prophet to be a Messenger, God is not going to allow someone to interfere with the mission being accomplished and the message getting out, because God is omnipotent so God can override the free will of anyone who might try to do such a thing. There were many attempts on the life of Baha’u’llah but nobody succeeded, but as I recall Baha’u’llah said that had any one of them succeeded God would just raise up another Messenger in His stead, so the upshot of all this is that God always gets what God wants accomplished.
So saying that God wants us to seek the truth, makes little sense if prophecies are possible, because the truth have already been determined by God and therefore little reason for having us wasting time seeking or finding it out.
But that is the whole point, for us to seek out what has happened, the truth that has been revealed by the Messengers of God.
If we take this even further, it would also not be possible for someone to choose whether or not they want to accept or reject God teachings or laws. Because assuming everyone did reject them, none would have cared to write them down and therefore the prophecies wouldn't have been possible either. For the prophecies to come true, things have to go according to what God have already decided, leaving no room for free will.
No, it does not matter if almost everyone rejected God’s teachings and laws because there would be a few people who accepted them and then later carry that message to other people who will accept them. It was not prophesied how many people would accept or reject the teachings and laws, that did not need to be known because it is dependent upon human free will choices and nobody could know what those choices would be but God, and there was no reason for God to reveal that to everyone in scriptures.
Trailblazer said: Moreover, we are all capable of understanding God’s teachings because we all have a rational mind.

This is confirming what I wrote in the start of this reply, that if God explained it to us, we would understand it, right?
We have a rational mind but we do not have a divine mind. Only a man with a divine mind can understand communication from God. The Messengers of God have a divine mind so they can understand communication from God and translate it into words we can comprehend. They have both a human nature and a dine nature so they can act as intermediaries between God and man to bridge the gap between two extremes.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
But, that's not my point. My point is that Christians built their doctrine based on the %&%^ stated in the NT. Don't blame them. It's God's fault for misleading them into thinking it was his truth. But, definitely don't blame people that believe the God of the Bible is not real... and I don't think you do. The next question is... Is the God of the Baha'i Faith real? After all, that God is supposed to be the same God of the Bible.
God did not mislead them because God did not write the Bible. Men wrote the Bible, men who were purportedly inspired by the Holy Spirit. Then men also MIS-interpreted the Bible and created the false doctrines of the Church.
George Townshend, Christ and Baha'u'llah, The False Prophets, pp. 25-30

On top of that, suffice to say that what Paul wrote is not what Jesus taught.
How Paul changed the course of Christianity

It is too much of a mess for me to straighten out so why would I waste my time on it?

As I have said before, there is only one true God. That God has been revealed a little differently with every new Messenger and religion, but it is the same God. I suggest you refer to the Writings of Baha'u'llah to get information about that God, but of course that is because I am a Baha'i. ;)

Of the following passages the only one that is different from what you will find in the Bible is the third one down, for obvious reasons you will see. Both Christianity and this third passage cannot be correct, so you have to pick a side, if you ever decide to pick any side at all. I sure wish you would pick a side, for your own sake, not for mine. :)

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 73

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures. This is the true meaning of Divine unity. He Who is the Eternal Truth is the one Power Who exerciseth undisputed sovereignty over the world of being, Whose image is reflected in the mirror of the entire creation. All existence is dependent upon Him, and from Him is derived the source of the sustenance of all things. This is what is meant by Divine unity; this is its fundamental principle.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167

“Our purpose in revealing these words is to show that the one true God hath, in His all-highest and transcendent station, ever been, and will everlastingly continue to be, exalted above the praise and conception of all else but Him. His creation hath ever existed, and the Manifestations of His Divine glory and the Day Springs of eternal holiness have been sent down from time immemorial, and been commissioned to summon mankind to the one true God. That the names of some of them are forgotten and the records of their lives lost is to be attributed to the disturbances and changes that have overtaken the world.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 174
 

night912

Well-Known Member
@ Nimos

Nimos said: Guess that is right, I can even think of a few. To get us started :)

1. Why would God require to have anything written down, why not simply reveal the truth to everyone, if he is capable of creating everything this should not be all that hard?


Why should God do that just because God is omnipotent thus capable? What is wrong with having stuff written down, if it is clearly written and easy to understand?

Nobody could ever understand God if God spoke to them directly because there is too big of a chasm between God and man, and that is why God uses Messengers who act as intermediaries; since they have a divine mind and they are also human they can bridge the gap.

Even if we could understand God directly, God revealing the truth to everyone would not accomplish God’s objectives. God wants us to search for the truth, and if we find it we can choose to accept or reject God’s teachings and laws because we have free will.

Nimos said: 2. Why not make it so everyone is born with the correct teachings of God, he could "write" it on our heart. That would reduce the amount of confusing quite a bit I think. Remember

Jeremiah 31:33
33 Rather, this is the covenant that I'll make with the house of Israel after those days," declares the LORD. "I'll put my Law within them and will write it on their hearts. I'll be their God and they will be my people.


God wants us to work for what we get and study what He reveals, not just have it given to us for free.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

Moreover, we are all capable of understanding God’s teachings because we all have a rational mind.

“It follows, therefore, that every man hath been, and will continue to be, able of himself to appreciate the Beauty of God, the Glorified. Had he not been endowed with such a capacity, how could he be called to account for his failure?”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 143


Nimos said: So guess one could wonder if God can write the laws or put them within them, why not the teachings as well?

Imo, what Jer 31:33 means is that the Law will be given in scripture and God will help them understand the law and instill it into their hearts. Then God will be their God and they will be God’s people. God can do the same thing with the teachings, help us understand and instill them into our hearts.

Nimos said: 3. Probably the most logic to me, is that God is man made and therefore never did it. But guess that is not going to be an accepted possibility, right? :p

It is acceptable because it is one of the three logical possibilities, which are as follows:

1. God exists and communicates through Messengers who reveal scriptures, or
2. God exists and does not communicate to humans, or
3. God does not exist
So since we have free will, we can still reject god knowing that he exist. Unless if you believe that simply believing that a god exist is an acceptance of god, then your aruguemnt is refuted.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
So since we have free will, we can still reject god knowing that he exist. Unless if you believe that simply believing that a god exist is an acceptance of god, then your aruguemnt is refuted.
I have no argument. Why do people try to turn a conversation into an argument?
Anyhow, you are right, since we have free will we can still reject God even if we know God exists.
Been there, done that. ;)
 
Top