Universalists maybe, but for traditionalists, it may be seen as insulting.
-
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!
What is the evidence for the God of Abraham?
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
Universalists maybe, but for traditionalists, it may be seen as insulting.
So is a leaf. So are galaxies. Complexity, in and of itself, is no proof of the Abrahamic God. Not in my view, but you're welcome to think it is. Something has to have led you to that belief.
nPeace
Veteran Member
I did look at about two of them - Romania and Russia, but I don't think I needed to read the entire thing, to know what it was describing.
You may not have understood the picture I painted. maybe you are not into art. Or my picture was abstract.
The term sect can be a bit broad.
Sect - a group of people with somewhat different religious beliefs (typically regarded as heretical) from those of a larger group to which they belong.
I'm not referring to the groups that leave and appoint a leader, to form a separate group.
How would I be considering that group JWs? Then I couldn't say they were united. I would be lying.
How would the early Christians have been identified? (1 Timothy 1:19, 20 ; 2 Timothy 2:17, 18 ;1 Timothy 1:19, 20 ;1 Timothy 6:21 ; 2 Timothy 4:3, 4)
Could you imagine people saying Christians, Christians A, Christians B...
You don't have to imagine it, as we do have people today, not realizing that the Christians are not really groups A, B, C... that call themselves by the name Christian.
The Christians were a united group. Yes, dissenters rose up in their midst, but they were not tolerated, and soon left. Similar with JWs.
With Bahais, don't you tolerate disagreements of groups within your midst?
A Bahá'í View of the Bible
Although Bahá'ís universally share a great respect for the Bible, and acknowledge its status as sacred literature, their individual views about its authoritative status range along the full spectrum of possibilities. At one end there are those who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God. At the other end are Bahá'ís attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is no more than a product of complex historical and human forces. Between these extremes is the possibility that the Bible contains the Word of God, but only in a particular sense of the phrase 'Word of God' or in particular texts
Although Bahá'ís universally share a great respect for the Bible, and acknowledge its status as sacred literature, their individual views about its authoritative status range along the full spectrum of possibilities. At one end there are those who assume the uncritical evangelical or fundamentalist-Christian view that the Bible is wholly and indisputably the word of God. At the other end are Bahá'ís attracted to the liberal, scholarly conclusion that the Bible is no more than a product of complex historical and human forces. Between these extremes is the possibility that the Bible contains the Word of God, but only in a particular sense of the phrase 'Word of God' or in particular texts
There is also multiple religious belonging, also known as double belonging. Are Bahais against that? Not that I know of, but you tell me.
Those who practice double belonging claim to be an adherent of two different religions at the same time or incorporate the practices of another religion into their own faith life. It is increasing with globalisation. One such example is a person attending a Christian church but also engaging in the Hindu practice of yoga.
Anyone can call themselves Bahaians, or JWs, but those sects are not what I refer to.
I'm saying that there are no sects among JWs.
To be honest with you though, I did not know of the groups that may still be existing.
I know that some did rejoin JWs.
Also what about the Just War theory. Would Bahais not go to war, and fight.
I don't mean to turn this thread into a war, so based after your response, I will respond in the other thread. Just give the okay to quote you from this thread.
One more thing.
Can you point out the main Bahai, and which you belong to.
Last edited:
How could the eye's complexity develop from natural selection, mutations, genetics, and random processes?
nPeace
Veteran Member
Is seems evident that it will be clear for all to see. It must be, for God to be fair. However, though clearly evident, God does not expect all to acknowledge. John 13:35 ; 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9
Just as with creation. It's evident, but not accepted - It's dismissed. Romans 1:19, 20
I believe a more likely explanation is humanity was not ready to embrace the abolition of slavery, the equality of men and women nor democracy two thousand years ago. These are all social movements that have taken root in a universal way during the nineteenth century and gained momentum through the twentieth and twenty first centuries.
I'm a theist, you know, lol. I'm just saying it's not evidence, but I don't need evidence. What makes you feel you need proof? If your mother gave you food, isn't that proof enough that she loves you? Or do you need her to stand there repeatedly saying, 'I love you'.
Why is it not evidence? Why wouldn't you need evidence? Wouldn't you want to know your parents? I don't feel I need proof because I don't doubt the existence of God I was replying to your questions. God gave us more than food, He died on the cross for our sins. Dying for our sins was the greatest expression of love that God gave for His creation.
I don't doubt the existence of God either. I don't need evidence either. But then I don't think in terms of 'evidence'.
What do you mean you don't think in terms of evidence?
Just like you said you don't need evidence. I don't spend my time trying to prove stuff. But I will be out. This is going nowhere. Very different paradigms.
It seems to me that if the Abrahamic God actually existed, the evidence for it would be on par with the evidence we have for the Moon: there would be so much of it that it would be nearly ubiquitous, and it would be consistent across many lines of investigation.
Is this Baha'i doctrine? I hear this argument a lot from Baha'i members here, but nobody else.
I personally find scripture and hearsay accounts from prophets and messengers to be basically useless for establishing that God exists. How could someone ever establish that a person was a messenger of God without first establishing that the God in question was real?
It seems to me that scripture might be useful as a guide to what God wants, but only after you've established that it's genuine... which itself is something that you can only do after you establish that God exists at all.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Requires some correction- Ekam Adviteeyam' (One without a second).
That means there is only one and not two - Allah and humankind, animals, vegetation, non-living substances. All these are appearances of 'what exists'. That does not leave any space for Allah or God. If I am, then there is none else, 'Aham Brahmasmi' (I am Brahman). If you are, then there is none else, 'Tat twam asi' (That is what you are). Hinduisms format is different from that of Abrahamic religions. If you are MS-DOS, Hinduism is GPT.
That is why I say that Caliph Ibrahim, Saddam, Gaddafi and Osma bin Laden or the street dog in my locality, also were / are none other than Brahman - simply because there is none other, only one. That is the meaning of 'Ekam Adviteeyam'.
Last edited:
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
But 'none of them' have ever given any evidence for existence of God or Allah or for their propounders to have been given a message. Does that not give their game out? Just all sort of empty claims but not a sliver of evidence! Don't you find that surprising?
There is ubiquitous and consistent evidence that the God of Abraham is real. The Bible doesn't contradict itself. The Bible says to love your neighbor and to love your enemies but in Matthew 10:5 Jesus also told his disciples not to go to certain groups of people. God's plan was to preach the gospel to Jews before taking it to the Gentiles. This was because the Jews already had the law of Moses, which prepared them for the gospel, because the gospel is the message of grace. That Bible verse doesn't contradict itself. Jesus didn't come to do away with the Law, he came to satisfy the demands of the Law. Jesus when he died on the cross paid the price for our sins so that we could accept his gift. There's no contradiction between Jesus saying he didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill it and Ephesians 2:13-15. No other faith has fulfillment of prophecies many years in advance of events that the people who wrote the prophecies didn't have control. Buddha and Confucius didn't have proven prophecies.
As you know, it's evidence to them, because they redefine evidence to mean something it doesn't, that suits their agenda. But then Baha'is alter a ton of previous beliefs of older religions to suit their definitions.
The message of prophecies is evidence of the existence for the existence of God. Only an all knowing God can accurately predict details of things that will happen thousands of years in the future. People can only know the future if it is told to them by an omniscient God. The Bible says that God declares the end from the beginning.
Sure there is.
I'm not so sure about that, but the phone book doesn't contradict itself either. Do you think this means that the phone book is divinely inspired?
From where I sit, none of the Abrahamic religions have proven prophecies either.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Prophecies of a book are like declarations of Napkin religion.
I was talking about the evidence of the Bible being ubiquitous.
The book of Mormon and the writings of Jehovah Witnesses have prophecies that didn't come true, so we know whether they are written by people or God.