Out of curiosity, why do we need a proof for the non-existence of God, but not for the non-existence of other things that we neither see nor actually encounter in any way that we know of?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It's workable means what? It's not okay?I didn't say any of that. I said it was workable.
Right. You were misled.Christians.
I hope you don't mind if i suggest... why not try reading the bible, instead of listening to what "Christians" say.Christians. It's not my theory, I've never found enough evidence to confirm it as factual.
Again... You got that from "Christians" right?No parents I know of use the threat of eternal torture. I didn't use fear as a weapon when raising my daughter and in my opinion it was successful.
Exactly. Did I say something else?Didn't say that, I said skip the earth phase where all the suffering takes place.
Yes.So it's all Adams fault that humans suffer?
Actually, I know many children who have suffered serious abuse, and serious painful diseases, who do feel the same way. Would you like to meet some?You might feel different if you were born in different circumstances. Do you think a child slowly starving to death in a poor African nation feels the same?
How? That's where you come in. I provided only four possibilities. You have another?So why not simply skip the pain and sorrow phase. God knew the results even before it happened.
It's workable means what? It's not okay?
okRight. You were misled.
Read it twice, it's what convinced me that the Christian God is at best very unlikely to exist.I hope you don't mind if i suggest... why not try reading the bible, instead of listening to what "Christians" say.
According to your interpretation. For me to accept your interpretation you would need to convince me that you have some esoteric ability that allows you to interpret the bible correctly.Again... You got that from "Christians" right?
The Bible does not agree. The threat of eternal torture for the disobedient is a doctrine of men.
Exactly. Did I say something else?
Yes.
Actually, I know many children who have suffered serious abuse, and serious painful diseases, who do feel the same way. Would you like to meet some?
How? That's where you come in. I provided only four possibilities. You have another?
With all due respect, a personal testimony is only a personal testimony. Not everybody is like you, most people aren't. Many people continue to suffer and many people commit suicide because of it. The only way you can make that work with the Baha'i party line is to say 'they will know more later' or their suffering is their fault because they just need to be 'more spiritual." The problem is that later is not here yet and they are still suffering. The other problem is that we should not be judging the spiritual condition of other people.
Just because it ended for you does not mean it has ended for other people. Just about the worst thing you can tell these people is that their suffering will be over when they die. Not only do you not know that, it is not helpful in the here and now.
What Baha'is do not understand is that the Baha'i party line on suffering hurts more than it helps these people.
It seems obvious to me that those Baha'is care more about the Baha'i party line than about compassion for other people.
They will do anything to retain their belief in an All-loving God, even it it hurts other people.
One reason I am not active in my Baha'i community is because I do not want to hear the Baha'i party line on suffering.
You cannot understand that when you are so close to it, you have to look from the outside in.
Of course it's workable. Why God not creating intelligent beings is workable... Actually, all 4 points are workable.1. Capable of being put into effective operation; practicable or feasible: a workable compromise.
2. Capable of being worked, dealt with, or handled:
Okayok
Read it twice, it's what convinced me that the Christian God is at best very unlikely to exist.
Not according to my interpretation.According to your interpretation. For me to accept your interpretation you would need to convince me that you have some esoteric ability that allows you to interpret the bible correctly.
You've read the Bible! Seriously?Seemed that way.
Good to know and speaks volumes for your Gods ability to hold a grudge.
That's a yes... obviously.You didn't answer the question
Your 5th was don't create humans then. Remember? I explained why.It is claimed God is all knowing.
I provided a 5th which is why I first replied to you. It does however require that God is all knowing. I don't know if you believe that because I'm not all knowing so can only go by what I see as a common belief and was taught.
Of course it's workable. Why God not creating intelligent beings is workable... Actually, all 4 points are workable.
There's only one that's reasonable and fair. That was the point. Wasn't it?
Not according to my interpretation.
(Romans 6:23) . . .the wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life. . .
It's up to you what you accept.
What would convince you?
You've read the Bible! Seriously?
Well, I don't know how you read it and could say that.
So God told Adam he would die if he ate from one tree he was not supposed to eat from, and God held a grudge when Adam passed away?
I really don't know what else to say honestly.
Yes you wouldn't feel the same if you were born in different circumstances?That's a yes... obviously.
No. You could not have read it.Your 5th was don't create humans then. Remember? I explained why.
Then why did he create them?God already has spirit creatures in heaven.
He was not creating humans to become spirit creatures in heaven. He didn't.
Why?
Nobody has ever thrown you out a window either. ...but it happens to others. So were we talking about individuals, or the human family?
i didn't use the word substance.
even the universe doesn't have a form because it's in motion. everything is in motion. the only permanency is motion, action. there is no permanent state;
If nothing that exists has to provide evidence of its existence that means God does not have to provide evidence of His existence.
Who is insisting on being believed?
I really really really really do not understand why you and others keep saying that I claimed that the Writings of Baha'ullah are evidence. That demonstrates that you are not reading and comprehending what I have written.
Got any better ideas? Would you rather have God control all your thoughts and actions, including believing in God and doing His will
This doesn't address my comment, which was, "I would call that an incoherent statement as well. How can anything be said to exist and change through time (be dynamic), yet have no form or substance? What's changing and what does it mean to say that something is changing that is indistinguishable from the nonexistent, which also have no form or substance, but also aren't understood as changing." The questions were rhetorical, and probably should have been declarative sentences instead.
If you disagree with my position, are you able to specify which part you don't like and give your reason for it being incorrect to you? Can you provide an example of something evolving yet having no form or substance (another rhetorical question, as I don't expect you to be able to do so)? Substance isn't limited to matter here - just some medium that can preserve form, which is that which allows us to be aware of any apprehension and to recognize it (understand some or all of its significance). Even a dream has (dynamic) form preserved in whatever the substance of conscious phenomena is, else it could have no meaning and could not be remembered.
Just when do I become a human Roomba - a literal mindless robot?
To exist, something must have form and substance (and I add duration, does an instant object exist?).
Got any better ideas? Would you rather have God control all your thoughts and actions, including believing in God and doing His will, even though you think God is not benevolent?
Agree. Things that exist are able to interact with one another at some time in some place, meaning that to be real is to be physical (made of matter/energy) and an aspect of nature. Everything that exists is all of these, nothing that doesn't exist is any of them, and there is no in between, such as having only some of those qualities. Thus, the idea of the supernatural is incoherent when it is described as being real but undetectable even in principle.
I like to give the example of werewolves versus wolves, the first imaginary, the second real. You can go to where a wolf is and interact with it even if that is only to see the light reflecting off of it or to hear it baying. It has substance and form. None of that is true about werewolves. Or gods.
Agree. Things that exist are able to interact with one another at some time in some place, meaning that to be real is to be physical (made of matter/energy) and an aspect of nature. Everything that exists is all of these, nothing that doesn't exist is any of them, and there is no in between, such as having only some of those qualities. Thus, the idea of the supernatural is incoherent when it is described as being real but undetectable even in principle.
I like to give the example of werewolves versus wolves, the first imaginary, the second real. You can go to where a wolf is and interact with it even if that is only to see the light reflecting off of it or to hear it baying. It has substance and form. None of that is true about werewolves. Or gods.
In order to prove God does not exist I believe one would have to know all that is.
Only things in the material world can be shown and proven to exist.I do not think that you understood his point. Things that do exist can be shown to exist. The object itself does not need to prove its existence. We do not know if a God exists since no one can prove or even show any evidence that a God exists. If I have a rock in my hand I can "prove" its existence quite convincingly. It is rather amazing that a simple rock can out perform God.
No, we are not 'insisting' on being believed. As far as our evidence is concerned, you can take it or leave it.Those that claim to have evidence are doing that. That is the purpose of evidence.
His Person and His completed Mission are the evidence that He was a Messenger of God, although they are not proof, since that claim cannot be proven, except to ourselves.You probably have in the past, but let's drop that for now. How do "His and Person and His completed Mission" give any evidence? His mission to the outside world looks like it failed.
His Person and His completed Mission are 'the evidence' that He was a Messenger of God.How does what is verifiable about Baha'u'llah provide any evidence at all? Please be specific. Are you going to refer to his failed prophecies again? If so please do not do that. You need something with some teeth in it.
You don't need a proof, you can simply decline to believe God exists.Out of curiosity, why do we need a proof for the non-existence of God
In order to prove God does not exist I believe one would have to know all that is. Then it would be an informed conclusion as opposed to just a denial. For denial is not proof.
The only thing humanity knows about God is that certain Teachers appear from time to time, establish a new religion and culture and claimed They were sent by God. But all They told us about God were His Attributes such as justice, mercy, forgiveness and love etc. We know nothing else.
Maybe by following Their counsels millions will have found they work so accept they are from God.
I believe that to disprove God one must also be able to give adequate and reasonable proof that the Manifestations of God were just lucky and had no invisible power assist Them.
If there is no God then why do over 5 billion people model their daily lives on Men Who died thousands of years ago, had no power or wealth and were opposed by very powerful and wealthy rulers? Why has Their Cause endured so long? Why are people willing to serve and die for Them and sacrifice for Their Cause?
It’s not just a case of cut and dried denying God for billions have gained some sort of spiritual strength from Figures like Jesus, Muhammad Moses and now Baha’u’llah Who was a Prisoner for 40 years, His Cause now embracing people from a cross section of humanity.
If truly God does not exist then These Great Beings need to be explained.
<sihg> When you can only repeat nonsensical claims, as you did about Baha'u'llah, you confirm that you only have dogma and that you do not have evidence.Only things in the material world can be shown and proven to exist.
God does not exist in the material world.
If God exists, it would have to be God that proves that to us since we cannot get to where God is located and prove it to ourselves.
No, we are not 'insisting' on being believed. As far as our evidence is concerned, you can take it or leave it.
His Person and His completed Mission are the evidence that He was a Messenger of God, although they are not proof, since that claim cannot be proven, except to ourselves.
The mission of Baha'u'llah did not fail, it was a complete success. How any people believe in Baha'u'llah to date is a completely moot point, since it has nothing to do with the success of His mission. He did everything that He set out to do, everything that God told Him to do, and that is why His mission was a success.
His Person and His completed Mission are 'the evidence' that He was a Messenger of God.
The prophecies are more evidence and they are not failed. They were all fulfilled.
<sihg>
As I do.You don't need a proof, you can simply decline to believe God exists.