• 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!

Proof against the existence of God?

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
So then would that not make Moses and Muhammad God?
I don't understand. How could Jesus be God, if he was a prophet of God, like Moses and Muhammad?

I do not view Jesus as literally God. However if God speaks through Jesus and declares Himself to be God then He speaks the truth. In a similar manner the Sun could be reflected in a mirror to provide the perfect image of the mirror. However the mirror is not the sun, nor is the Manifestation of God literally God.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
Their words have also been twisted and used for great evil. Why would a God let their words be used like that?

Many historical figures are still remembered today, it's not that uncommon.



Gravity can be tested by some very simple experiments. I am unaware of any simple God tests.



I doubt the Lords invincible power when his words get used for evil.


There is a simple God test, common to most spiritual traditions. I’m surprised it’s passed you by, if you are in any way sincere;

Be still, and know that I am God.
-Psalm 46

Stop the noise,
and you will hear His voice
in the silence.
- Jelaluddin Rumi

The little space within the heart
is as vast as the great universe.
The heavens and the earth are there,
and the sun and the moon and the stars.
Fire and lightning and wind are there,
and all that is now, and all that is not.
- Swami Prabhavananda
 

loverofhumanity

We are all the leaves of one tree
Premium Member
I'm not sure what free will has to do with what we were discussing but since you brought it up...

In my opinion free will is nothing but an excuse used by religion when they can think of nothing else.

What free will does a kidnapped, abused child have as they are about to be murdered.
What free will does a mentally ill person have?
What free will does a 20 year old with an inoperable brain tumour have?



All that is just your opinion unless you have valid evidence to back it up. If the prophets were so great why are their words interpreted so differently among the numerous different religions?

What's your evidence that Moses was the first to come up with thou shalt not kill? And it's a great example to show how the bible is ineffectual. The Israelites did a lot of killing after they got that law.



If there were one religion with one message I would agree with you.




Much evil has also come from religion. And much good has also come from non religious organisations.

That’s why boundaries are required to keep man from harming himself and others and which obedience to the laws of God prevents. Complete freedom to do whatever we want is the cause of many problems and by disobeying the laws of God we get anarchy, violence and terrorism.

The fact that a law of God established thousands of years ago is accepted by all the world proves its value. Most people are law abiding but there will always be those who break the rules.

As to there being one religion that is a fact if one delves deeper. All the religions were revealed progressively historically. Like classes in a school. There is only one religion which we can say is ‘updated’ from time to time with new laws and teachings according to man’s social and intellectual evolution and development. For example Christ focused on the individual, then Muhammad took it a step further with laws for nationhood and Baha’u’llah has now appeared with laws and teachings for a world civilisation and with all the technological advances recently that is now very possible. But it’s all part of the one process.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
What I did there was read your scripture and then post a contradictory scripture. So to get back on topic... is evidence for me that God does not exist. Not proof as the OP wants but evidence.
To be able to say something is contradictory with any certainty, one would have had to investigate and ruled out any mistaken view, since things may appear to be, but not be.
Have you done so?

I'm pointing out that what appears to be a contradiction to you, is not. I showed why.

Fancy way of saying you interpret them.
To you, but that too has not been demonstrated by you.
Notice... you only claim it. That's the easiest thing for anyone to do.

I don't understand what you mean.
You don't? There may be a good explanation for that. Why not listen for the point.
People do not speak in sentences. They connect sentences to make a point.
If you take every sentence separately, it's obvious you won't understand.

It seems to me you're trying to take short passages from here and there to justify your interpretation.
It seems that way perhaps because you broke two connected paragraphs into two separate and distinct parts.

Thus, you missed the point.
Since the ones some people ignore... case in point - Romans 6:23; Genesis 3:19 + Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalms 146:4, says A, the ones some people run for, don't say A is wrong. They simply say, "You misunderstand me, if you think I contradict A. So maybe go back to the beginning and come again."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's equivalent to you showing me Ephesians 5:28, 29
28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself, 29 for no man ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cherishes it, just as the Christ does the congregation,
...along with Matthew 22:39
...and I run for Matthew 5:29-30... ignoring anything you showed me, and said, No. I have a right to cut off anything that offends me, because Jesus said so.

We agree on something but probably for different reasons. I read the bible as a series of books and don't jump about. I'm a simple bloke so my interpretations are simple
As a series of books? You mean, you read it like differnt novels by different authors?

How does your interpretations work?
Do they go like... "I think this or that, because it appears this is the case."?
Or do they go... "What does he mean? I wonder if there is any clarity given. Let me look and see, or wait and see."?
Or other?

I didn't ask you to convince me, I said evidence would be needed to convince me.
What sort of evidence? What would that evidence look like?

Everybody interprets the information they take in. Give 10 people a simple short story and then ask them about it and I'm fairly certain you would get 10 different versions. Maybe similar but each individually different.
Did you, or do you interpret everything your mother told, or tells you?

The bible. Did not sin happen because of Adam and Eve?
Depends on what you mean by sin. The Bible says the one called Devil sinned.
(1 John 3:8) . . .the Devil has been sinning from the beginning. . . John 8:44

I read it like I said. Twice in fact, some parts even more. No I did not study it, I'm certainly not a biblical scholar,
Okay. That's an important piece of information.
Do you believe you are in any position to speak with any authority, or with any expertise on any documentation you have not studied?

Fair enough

It was just a simple hypothetical. I like hypotheticals but it appears most don't share my enthusiasm.

I was talking about a child born in poverty and starving to death. I doubt if they're seeing a lot of beauty in the world.
I said yes.
I mentioned children who actually are born with severe challenges, and grow up with a very positive mentality.
I even offered to introduce them to you.
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?

Is it the case you really want to see, or have you made up your mind already, on what you think?
What can anyone show you?
Why not google it.

What else is there to say that would take you out of your doubt? Nothing?

You should try reading what I say instead of interpreting it to mean something completely different. I'm a pretty simple bloke, there are no hidden meanings.
I did not interpret what you said.
I did read what you said.

This is what you said...
I can think of a 5. He's supposedly all knowing so why even bother with the earth phase of this bizarre selection process, he knows the results so move straight on to the heaven phase of his experiment.

I said...
Okay, so don't create humans then.

There is no heaven phase though.
Many think the earth was made as some temperary dwelling - a "phase."

However, the Bible does not agree with that idea.

Isaiah 45:18; Psalms 37:29; Psalms 115:16

The reason anyone goes to heaven is to rule as kings and priests, and they are few only.
Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:4-6; Revelation 14:1-4

That would not have happened without Adam and Eve.
If Adam had not sinned the earth would have been filled with people living with no pain or suffering. A paradise.

So no humans. No heavenly life. So you never get to exist.

Did you not read that, or did you not understand?
Simplifying...
The earth is not a first phase. It never was. So that so called first phase does not exist. it never did. Nothing for God to skip.
Therefore, if God skipped anything, it would be man's existence. Man simply would not have come to be.

Do you understand?

You've posted over 10 scriptures in this one post. It's a bit unfair, I do this as a hobby, not a job.
Sorry.
It does not hurt to learn what one does not know.
I love it when people show me things. I don't complain when people give me information on their evolution beliefs. I welcome it, because they are giving me information they think 1) sheds light on, or 2) explains their beliefs, and 3) I get to take a look at what they offer. In other words, I'm open.. not closed.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Then I fail to see why you brought it up.
If every human is superstitious, why single out believers in God, as if their superstition is any different to atheists. :shrug:

...and wouldn't your view on that make the whole "we don't believe because there is no evidence" void?
Why would you be superstitious, if there is no evidence?
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
If every human is superstitious, why single out believers in God, as if their superstition is any different to atheists. :shrug:

Because this thread is about god and superstitious beliefs are a cornerstone of religion.
Humans tend to be religious because humans tend to be superstitious.

What you do there is like complaining that someone brings up the concept of "fingers" in a thread about thumbs.

...and wouldn't your view on that make the whole "we don't believe because there is no evidence" void?

No.

Why would you be superstitious, if there is no evidence?

Because superstition is the act of believing without sufficient evidence.

Evidence is the anti-dote of superstition.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The only thing I differ on is when you say "made of matter/energy", and that only because I allow the theists the possibility that there could be some state of reality that consists of some other "stuff". Given that though the things there would still have to have form and substance, just be made of this other "stuff".

Agreed. I suspect that all phenomena including consciousness are seeing the same primeval substance in different ways. The history of science has included a series of unifications, and the trend suggests that space, time, matter, energy, force, and consciousness will all be unified eventually. Maxwell unified electricity, magnetism, and light (EM radiation), then the nuclear forces were unified to that, matter and energy (E=mc2), particle and wave, space and time, etc.. It's why I like neutral monism best as an account of the relationship of mind and matter, where neither is an epiphenomenon of the other, but rather, both are faces of a prior substance manifesting in different ways.

I suppose you could argue that our kind of "stuff" can't interact with this other "stuff", but that would make the whole question moot as we could never have any evidence for it.

You are describing what I call metaphysical reality with no projection into conscious content (experience) - items said to exist but are not testable (claims about it are not falsifiable). Such things aren't worth thinking about. Their ontological status is indistinguishable from nonexistence. I'm thinking of Plato's cave, where experience (Kant's phenomena) is limited to observing the shadows of objects not directly visible (Kant's noumena, or ding an sich). Suppose we posit the existence of something among the noumena outside the cave (outside the theater of consciousness) that doesn't cast shadows or modify the shadows from things that do. That would be a metaphysical object with no physical manifestation, its existence indistinguishable from its nonexistence, and our apathy on the matter justified. These are the things the claims about which are neither correct nor incorrect, but "not even wrong."

Some atheists in my experience like to misrepresent the Abrahamic God by focusing on selected scripture.

How is that misrepresentation? Misrepresentation occurs when context that reverses the meaning is omitted, as when someone says that scripture there is no God, when what it says is that that is the belief of a fool. You know who does that a lot? Believers, when they cite one of two or more conflicting scriptures to imply that the Bible offers a clear and consistent message when in fact the opposite is the case.

What about the laws of physics? They are proven to exist but by their signs not substance.

The laws of physics are abstractions that exist in some minds and summarize what can be experienced.

Thought, emotion, virtues exist but are not physical realities. Our conscience and mind are not physical but exist.

You might have seen my comment above to Alien. Consciousness is an aspect of reality, of nature. It can activate muscles through willpower. It interacts with real things and thus is real itself.

How do we prove the influence of the Prophets never existed when we see cultures and civilisations raised on Their teachings.

The words of the prophets *HAVE* influenced history. Is that part of an argument that the gods they believed in exist as well as more than ideas in their minds?

I think the only way to prove God does not exist is to prove These Beings had no effect on humanity.

Their effect is not evidence for their god's existence, just evidence that that is believed to be the case..

If God made us all subservient slaves to His Will then we would be no more than mechanical robots.

Perhaps that's what we are. How can you know otherwise? By the way it feels? There are good arguments that free will is an illusion.

And how does reducing the number of choices that a person wants to make diminishing their lives? I'd say it would improve their lives if they could not commit acts of malice because it never occurred to them to do so.

Incidentally, what are you expecting heaven to be like? Will souls have free will and urges to harm one another as they did when in bodies before death, or do you think God will remove all of that from their thoughts? And if He does, how is that not the mindless robot you just described and which believers say God does not want his devotees to be.

Do we really want freedom of choice taken away?

Yes, in many areas.

You may know that I am an American expatriate living in Mexico. We have local Facebook chat groups. A recent arrival asked where he could get a gun to carry legally. He was told that he can't, that getting a gun permit is difficult and impossible for a carry permit. He was surprised and upset, asking if he's expected to just be a sitting duck in this country. The consensus was that we prefer a country like this one, are glad that he does not have that choice, and glad that nobody else does, either.

Thou shalt not kill is imbedded in the laws of every nation on earth even though it originated with Moses.

No, that idea did not originate with Moses.

Much good has come from religion. Charities, Humanitarian organisations, schools, universities, promotes goodwill and the golden rule, promotes love and brotherhood, teaches service to humanity and to help the poor, promotes good morals and the leading of a virtuous life.

None of that is the result of a god belief or requires a god belief to value. In fact, humanism and secular institutions like social democracies do all of that better. I was just involved in a discussion with locals regarding the church. None of us was aware of even one nickel from the collection plate being spent on the community in any way. Look at the States, and the battles between the church and humanists. Who's embodying the Golden Rule there, the Christians banning books, besetting LGBTQ+, and voting for Republicans to impose their beliefs on others using the force of government, or the humanists opposing them at every turn?
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I have no idea why you think that if God exists God would be detectable.

Because that's what it means to say that something exists. It means to interact in space and time with other things that exist, and that makes all such things detectable.

God would only be detectable if God chose to be detectable

That's special pleading. That statement is not considered correct about anything else said to exist.

How do you think it is perfectly feasible for all humans to have natures that would exhibit the same level of moral behavior as the best of us that exist now? How could a benevolent God could have done that? Please don't say "God is omnipotent so God can do anything" because that is irrelevant.

So are you abandoning omnipotence as well as omnibenevolence? That's also a good choice. But for those who still believe in such a deity, it's a very relevant objection. A tri-omni deity ought to be able to create creatures with an irresistible and impeccable moral sense.

God does not want belief without evidence, God wants belief without proof.

They are the same thing qualitatively differing only by degree. Some evidence is proof. Sometimes, two pieces of evidence constitute proof where either alone leaves reasonable doubt.

If there was no afterlife then that nonbeliever would probably never know what he missed out on by not believing.

I know what I missed out on by not believing - a lifetime of religion. Where's the value there for somebody comfortable living without it, especially somebody who has tasted and discarded it? Do you know what you missed out on by being a believer?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
There is a tendency to anthropomorhise God and the way he acts towards us. When I think of all loving in a human sense, a loving spouse or devoted friend comes to mind. I don't view our relationship with God in quite the same way. Do you?
What... lower God to a loving spouse or devoted friend! :D
Actually yes, I do... but not just me.

God compares himself to a husband of a wife - his people, so that he even said, that anyone touching them is figuratively touching his eyeball.
They were that precious to him, and he cherished them as a husband cherishes a beloved wife.
Sadly, they were unfaithful, like an adulterous wife, prostituting herself.
Isaiah 54:5, 6; Isaiah 62:4; Jeremiah 3:20

God also considers faithful ones his friend.
2 Chronicles 20:7; Isaiah 41:8; James 2:23

His love for his people if far greater than any relationship on earth, because Jehovah is loyal, and always will be.
We are usually disloyal, and unfaithful.

I think people take that "all-loving" concept to a disconnected level, but I believe it's a way of creating a dilemma... I usuall call it a strawman.
It's designed to make an argument easy for them to hide behind... imo.

tenor.gif

I never actually saw all-loving in the Bible, so I don't know where it came from, other than people's ideas.
If they are referring to 1 John 4:8 - God is love, which means obviously that God's very essence is love, so that God's every action must be motivated by love, then yes, I can agree with that.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Because this thread is about god and superstitious beliefs are a cornerstone of religion.
Humans tend to be religious because humans tend to be superstitious.

What you do there is like complaining that someone brings up the concept of "fingers" in a thread about thumbs.



No.



Because superstition is the act of believing without sufficient evidence.

Evidence is the anti-dote of superstition.
So atheists believe things for which there is no evidence. Hence the claim that they don't believe in gods for the reason that there is no evidence, is bogus.
 

Alien826

No religious beliefs
How do you think it is perfectly feasible for all humans to have natures that would exhibit the same level of moral behavior as the best of us that exist now?

Because humans with high moral values exist. It follows that it is perfectly possible for more such people to exist. I don't see how you object to that as a possibility.

How could a benevolent God could have done that?
Please don't say "God is omnipotent so God can do anything" because that is irrelevant.

How? By whatever means he used to create us in the first place. Given that we have living examples of what I am referring to, I don't see how it would need some higher level of power to create more of us like that.

Maybe I'm missing your point or you are missing mine.

(Never mind the free will, put it on the back burner for the time being.)

Don't leave it there, it is critical to my argument.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
That’s why boundaries are required to keep man from harming himself and others and which obedience to the laws of God prevents. Complete freedom to do whatever we want is the cause of many problems and by disobeying the laws of God we get anarchy, violence and terrorism.

The fact that a law of God established thousands of years ago is accepted by all the world proves its value. Most people are law abiding but there will always be those who break the rules.

This is your answer to my free will questions? Seriously? Or maybe you simply ignored the questions and this is some kind of random response?

As to there being one religion that is a fact if one delves deeper. All the religions were revealed progressively historically. Like classes in a school. There is only one religion which we can say is ‘updated’ from time to time with new laws and teachings according to man’s social and intellectual evolution and development. For example Christ focused on the individual, then Muhammad took it a step further with laws for nationhood and Baha’u’llah has now appeared with laws and teachings for a world civilisation and with all the technological advances recently that is now very possible. But it’s all part of the one process.

I'm not sure how deep I'd have to delve to get over differences like Jesus being God, the numerous Hindu Gods, the sacrifice loving war God of the OT.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.
I can think of many reasons that why one would think there cannot possibly be a God, but to my knowledge, the Bahai scriptures have an answer for all of then.

For example, problem of evil is one the main reasons that many people think there cannot be a God, to which Bahai scriptures says, this world is like a school to prepare us for the next life, so, if there was no injustice then justice would not make sense. Every good quality can exist of the opposite exists. So, light is meaningful since there is darkness, and if there was no darkness, light would be meaningless. So, for us to gain understanding of what is good and evil, we need a school that tells us both, and that is why God created this world with evil.
Then, many people may day, this world have so much suffering, and thus a kind God is impossible. Then Bahai scriptures answer this, saying this world has tests for believers and punishment for disbelievers so, it can change their heart, or soften their heart by these difficulties and punishments.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
To be able to say something is contradictory with any certainty, one would have had to investigate and ruled out any mistaken view, since things may appear to be, but not be.
Have you done so?

I'm pointing out that what appears to be a contradiction to you, is not. I showed why.


To you, but that too has not been demonstrated by you.
Notice... you only claim it. That's the easiest thing for anyone to do.


You don't? There may be a good explanation for that. Why not listen for the point.
People do not speak in sentences. They connect sentences to make a point.
If you take every sentence separately, it's obvious you won't understand.


It seems that way perhaps because you broke two connected paragraphs into two separate and distinct parts.

Thus, you missed the point.
Since the ones some people ignore... case in point - Romans 6:23; Genesis 3:19 + Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalms 146:4, says A, the ones some people run for, don't say A is wrong. They simply say, "You misunderstand me, if you think I contradict A. So maybe go back to the beginning and come again."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's equivalent to you showing me Ephesians 5:28, 29
28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself, 29 for no man ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cherishes it, just as the Christ does the congregation,
...along with Matthew 22:39
...and I run for Matthew 5:29-30... ignoring anything you showed me, and said, No. I have a right to cut off anything that offends me, because Jesus said so.


As a series of books? You mean, you read it like differnt novels by different authors?

How does your interpretations work?
Do they go like... "I think this or that, because it appears this is the case."?
Or do they go... "What does he mean? I wonder if there is any clarity given. Let me look and see, or wait and see."?
Or other?


What sort of evidence? What would that evidence look like?


Did you, or do you interpret everything your mother told, or tells you?


Depends on what you mean by sin. The Bible says the one called Devil sinned.
(1 John 3:8) . . .the Devil has been sinning from the beginning. . . John 8:44


Okay. That's an important piece of information.
Do you believe you are in any position to speak with any authority, or with any expertise on any documentation you have not studied?


I said yes.
I mentioned children who actually are born with severe challenges, and grow up with a very positive mentality.
I even offered to introduce them to you.
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?

Is it the case you really want to see, or have you made up your mind already, on what you think?
What can anyone show you?
Why not google it.

What else is there to say that would take you out of your doubt? Nothing?


I did not interpret what you said.
I did read what you said.

This is what you said...
I can think of a 5. He's supposedly all knowing so why even bother with the earth phase of this bizarre selection process, he knows the results so move straight on to the heaven phase of his experiment.

I said...
Okay, so don't create humans then.

There is no heaven phase though.
Many think the earth was made as some temperary dwelling - a "phase."

However, the Bible does not agree with that idea.

Isaiah 45:18; Psalms 37:29; Psalms 115:16

The reason anyone goes to heaven is to rule as kings and priests, and they are few only.
Revelation 5:10; Revelation 20:4-6; Revelation 14:1-4

That would not have happened without Adam and Eve.
If Adam had not sinned the earth would have been filled with people living with no pain or suffering. A paradise.

So no humans. No heavenly life. So you never get to exist.

Did you not read that, or did you not understand?
Simplifying...
The earth is not a first phase. It never was. So that so called first phase does not exist. it never did. Nothing for God to skip.
Therefore, if God skipped anything, it would be man's existence. Man simply would not have come to be.

Do you understand?


Sorry.
It does not hurt to learn what one does not know.
I love it when people show me things. I don't complain when people give me information on their evolution beliefs. I welcome it, because they are giving me information they think 1) sheds light on, or 2) explains their beliefs, and 3) I get to take a look at what they offer. In other words, I'm open.. not closed.

Thanks for the response but there is too much to deal with in one post. I don't know how it spilled it in so many directions but it's gone way off topic and I have a busy day so I'll leave it there.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I can think of many reasons that why one would think there cannot possibly be a God, but to my knowledge, the Bahai scriptures have an answer for all of then.
That's true, the Baha'i scriptures has an answer to all of them, that is called a religious apologetic.
However, there is a counter-response to all of them as well. ;)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Because humans with high moral values exist. It follows that it is perfectly possible for more such people to exist. I don't see how you object to that as a possibility.
I do not object o that possibility. I think it is a great idea and I believe it will be that way in the future.

"In this age humanity has strayed far from the path of truth, and the call of Bahá’u’lláh to recognize Him as the viceregent of God on earth has fallen on deaf ears. But a careful study of His writings leads us to believe that His Revelation, being the culmination of past Revelations and one which has ushered in the Day of God Himself, will exert such a potent influence upon mankind as a whole that eventually all the peoples of the world will recognize His station of their own free will and embrace His cause of their own volition. And this in turn will bring about, in the distant future, the appearance of a new race of men whose noble character and spiritual virtues we, in this age, are unable to visualize."
Adib Taherzadeh, The Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh v 3, p. 3

New Race of Men | Bahá’í Quotes
How? By whatever means he used to create us in the first place. Given that we have living examples of what I am referring to, I don't see how it would need some higher level of power to create more of us like that.

Maybe I'm missing your point or you are missing mine.
Why would/should God create more people like that? The whole purpose of this life is for men to strive and 'become' moral by making the right choices and learning through experience. If God created people ready-made as moral beings then there would be no purpose for this life. Eat, drink, and be merry is not the purpose of life.
Don't leave it there, it is critical to my argument.
Free will is also critical to my argument, because the ability to choose between good and evil is how people become moral or immoral, whatever the case may be.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I am not aware of the counter responses though.
Then you might need to change your user name. Apologetics are almost always met by counter apologetics.

And the quality of apologetics can vary quite a bit. For US Christianity there is almost an apologetics industry. The problem is that they become "Liars for Jesus" since they never correct the failed arguments of those on their own side. I am not familiar enough with Baha'i apologetics, but it is likely to have the same problem.
 

InvestigateTruth

Well-Known Member
Then you might need to change your user name. Apologetics are almost always met by counter apologetics.

And the quality of apologetics can vary quite a bit. For US Christianity there is almost an apologetics industry. The problem is that they become "Liars for Jesus" since they never correct the failed arguments of those on their own side. I am not familiar enough with Baha'i apologetics, but it is likely to have the same problem.
You are welcome to give a counter response.
I think, off course it is always possible to keep arguing and arguing forever. But I meant a valid counter answer that prove the answers wrong.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You are welcome to give a counter response.
I think, off course it is always possible to keep arguing and arguing forever. But I meant a valid counter answer that prove the answers wrong.
I would need a specific claim. I do it regularly with Christian apologetics. I do not know that much about Baha'i arguments so I cannot say for sure that they are guilty of the same poor argumentation.

Why do you think that your religion is right and what reliable evidence do you have for your beliefs?
 
Top