"Man is absolutely helpless and dependent, since might and power belong especially to God,"
Yes. He literally did.
Having cake. Eating it too.
You took that out of context...
"Now another question arises. Man is absolutely helpless and dependent, since might and power belong especially to God. Both exaltation and humiliation depend upon the good pleasure and the will of the Most High."
Some Answered Questions
That does not mean we do not have free will. It means God has all power, so we are dependent upon God. Note that it does not say God is doing anything for us, so that means we have to make our own choices.
As I've now explained probably a dozen times (13th times the charm?) it's premised on the notion that beliefs are chosen. They aren't. I can't "try hard" to have a certain belief.
I never said you could.
I want you to reread that statement, and carefully think through how silly it is. That's literally what omnipotence means. The philosophical conundrum and contradictions this creates have led most theistic theologians and apologists to walk back the meaning to something like what you're describing.
Even if omnipotent means
can do anything, it does not mean
will do anything, so it still does not help you out. God does not do anything that God does not want/choose to do, period. That comes with the territory of being omnipotent. You are not omnipotent so you cannot make God do anything.
Why would it matter? It would matter in terms of God's motivations to do what he does.
I told you what that motivation was. God’s motivation for us to believe in Him is because it benefits us, but it does not do any good at all to just believe that God exists, without getting the message God wants us to have. As such, the whisper in your ear – “I exist” -- is a waste of time for both you and God because it accomplishes nothing. Lots of people “believe” God exists, but to what avail? If they are not getting God’s message for this age, they have no idea what God’s will is for them.
Yes. evidence which is sh*tty and which God knows all of us won't accept. 100% his choice. Again, he's holding all the cards and invented the rules of the game. There's no absolving him of the responsibility of his choices.
God is
responsible for everything in existence, but God is not
answerable to any humans. That comes with being omnipotent.
what are those obvious logical flaws?
The belief that beliefs are things we choose and should try hard to obtain, despite all evidence to the contrary.
We should only try hard to obtain belief in God if we want to believe in God. If we find evidence that convinces us, we will be compelled to believe; if not we won’t believe.
The belief that humans have "free" will, despite all evidence to the contrary (including your own prophet's teachings).
No, that is not true at all that there is evidence to the contrary from my religion. Abdu’l-Baha clearly said we have free will to make moral choices. He said nothing about being able to choose to believe in God.
The belief that God is not responsible for people's disbelief despite being omnipotent and choosing a course of action which guarantees it.
That is ludicrous. God is not responsible for anyone's disbelief. Most people believe in God because of the evidence God provides; only 7% of people in the world do not believe in God and that is either because they cannot accept the evidence God provides or they just do not care about believing in God. Why should God provide some other kind of evidence just because 7% of people cannot believe based upon the evidence He provided? God is not a short order cook.
According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are
450 to
500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (
200 million convinced atheists).
Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia
“Despite being omnipotent…” What does that have to do with anything? Oh I know, I ought to know, because I have been listening to this for six years… God is omnipotent so God can do anything, which for certain atheists translates to “God is omnipotent so God should hop to and do what I want Him to do, provide some better evidence.”
The idea that God is hiding and He had better come out of hiding or else I won’t believe in Him is very childish.
Then you believe that the basis upon which we come to understand that everything else in the universe exists is "childish." Okay then.
Sorry, I do not see the connection.
No, ZERO evidence indicates God has ever done ANYTHING. The evidence that we have is that religions have often CLAIMED that God speaks through their special messengers, prophets, messiahs, etc. No religion has ever demonstrated that their claims are CORRECT. For some reason, theists just cannot accept that reality, but it does not change that reality.
How could religions prove that God speaks through their special messengers, prophets, messiahs? Try to use your logical mind.
This is the crux of the problem, atheists want proof, not just evidence, and there can never be the kind of proof that they want for God.
I agree that covering the same ground over and over is not productive.
I consider myself done posting to him, unless he has something new.
The issue here, in terms of "excuses," is that you are asking us to accept the idea that your God, who is omnipotent, omniscient, etc. wants us to believe he exists (or does he?) on the basis of completely natural, mundane means, which are the same means used by literally every prophetic religion you believe is false. So it's weird that the true God would communicate through the same fallible, mundane means of people claiming they speak for him that countless people whose message you don't accept have also used. In fact, it's more than weird - it's completely implausible.
I accept all the messages that have come from God through true Messengers of God. Their social teachings needed to be updated to suit the times, but the spiritual teachings are the same in all the great religions.
I have asked this on previous threads, and this was before I remember seeing you on this forum. Realistically, what other “means” could God use? When I asked this nobody could come up with anything that would work as well as Messengers, or work at all, to get the same message out to everyone. It is ludicrous to think that God should reveal the 15,000 tablets He revealed to Baha’u’llah to every one of the 7.7 billion people in the world. Please do not tell me “God is omnipotent do God can do anything.” There is no reason why God would do this and certainly very few of the world population could understand what was revealed to Baha’u’llah, if it was revealed to them directly.
Got it, so all the attributes of God that are actually distinguishable as divine, Messengers don't have. They only have the mundane ones that lots of people who aren't Messengers also have.
Logically speaking, how could a man be Eternal, Holy, Unchanging, Impassable, Infinite, Omnipresent, All-powerful, All-Knowing, All-Wise, Self-Existent, Self-Sufficient, Sovereign, Righteous, and Immaterial, even if He has a divine nature, which all the Messengers of God had? That is not possible. However, the Messengers do have qualities that distinguish them from ordinary humans, not the least of which is the ability to comprehend God and write down what God communicated. They can also do miracles and see into the future, not that this is that important.
You see the obvious problem with that in terms of believability, right? But perhaps we should wait for your thread.
I guess I do not see it because I do not have a bias against the idea of Messengers and I never did. To me it always made sense that there would need to be an intermediary between God and humans.
