Atheists have faith.

[TransmutingSoul]

That's really self serving. Even Trump's ego wasn't that big.

Again that is just a comment based in th3 ignorance of the facts.

You do realise that a comment such as that meant dire persecution and eventually execution in Persia.

So how is that self serving in the way you have offered?

Maybe the comment was based in Truth and as such, has far greater ramifications.

Regards Tony

 

[Azrael Antilla]

This OP was inspired by a response in another post.

What is it to have Faith?

I see that many that do not have a belief in God or a Religion, still have Faith. I see that many actions are based on morals that transcend this mortal world and are thus undertaken in Faith.

It could be seen that it is naught but a faith to take a stance that there is no God.

Could that be a coping mechanism, that those that choose this path will not be held accountable for their decisions, that they think they are free of the weight of this world, that they will live how they want to, die and that's it?

Does this free a person from considering that there may be deeper moral or ethical responsibilities, when all we have to use as boundaries, are the materialistic trends?

Personally I have faith and I am thankful that I will be accountable for the decisions I make and the weight of the world can be fully experienced and appreciated.

"All humanity must obtain a livelihood by sweat of the brow and bodily exertion, at the same time seeking to lift the burden of others, striving to be the source of comfort to souls and facilitating the means of living. This in itself is devotion to God. Bahá’u’lláh has thereby encouraged action and stimulated service."

‘Abdu’l-Bahá: Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 182

" Every person must have an occupation, a trade or a craft, so that he may carry other people's burdens, and not himself be a burden to others."

‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Compilation of Compilations vol. I, p. 3

Faith is a service to all we cross paths with, without faith, one can deprive themselves from such service. With Faith our heart longs to be of this service.

So I see an Athiest can have Faith when they too transcend their own desires and serve others in preference of self.

So that is the debate, but is it really a debate?

Do you give of yourself to others?

As this action is a fundamental Faith based moral decision, do you have faith that action leads to better outcomes?

Regards Tony

P/S Edited as the purpose is to explore our actions against faith, it is not to bash an atheist. Sorry it was not well worded.

Serving others is not high on my list of priorities. I will give help when asked, but I don't go looking for people to help as such. As a legal advisor, I am asked for free legal assistance and sign posting etc nearly every week. I never say no even though I am not too happy that once again, someone I know has told others to seek me out for help and advice. Deep down I guess I am honoured that people recommend my name. It's just that I am always wary of being taken for a soft touch, and I dont like the idea of being exploited, at all. It's hard or impossible to know the true financial circumstances of many pro bono clients without in depth investment of time and effort to investigate. So I just say yes no problem. Such a martyr I know, but I don't like being used. Especially when I have my own bills to pay and mouths to feed.

 

[ecco]

This year is the 100 year commemoration of.his passing. Abdul'baha spent 239 days in America, telling them how to embrace peace. It is fact that most Americans in that time would have read about him in the press.

Most of what Google shows us about that historic visit comes from Bahai sites. A dozen press clippings from a 239 day visitation is not much. I highly doubt that the average American was aware of his visit.

The Beatles one-time guru, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, had a far greater impact than your Abdulbaha. So did L. Ron Hubbard and Sun Myung Moon.

So, why bother posting?

 

[ecco]

You do realise that a comment such as that meant dire persecution and eventually execution in Persia.

So how is that self serving in the way you have offered?

Maybe the comment was based in Truth and as such, has far greater ramifications.

All holier-than-thou comments are self-serving. Many men, and women, have made comments that led to their prosecution and death. Not all have been self-serving. Many have been in defense of Country and even in defense of plain folk.



In any case, you still have not clarified why The Bab was so closely followed by Balluhah. That makes little sense if God's plan is to send one Messenger for each "age". It seems more likely that a mortal, The Bab, tried to start a new religion. It made little progress so another mere mortal, Ballulha, jumped in and said "I am the Messenger".




ETA: If memory serves, Balluah also decreed that there would be no more Messengers for 1000 years, thereby ensuring his eternal glorification.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Serving others is not high on my list of priorities. I will give help when asked, but I don't go looking for people to help as such. As a legal advisor, I am asked for free legal assistance and sign posting etc nearly every week. I never say no even though I am not too happy that once again, someone I know has told others to seek me out for help and advice. Deep down I guess I am honoured that people recommend my name. It's just that I am always wary of being taken for a soft touch, and I dont like the idea of being exploited, at all. It's hard or impossible to know the true financial circumstances of many pro bono clients without in depth investment of time and effort to investigate. So I just say yes no problem. Such a martyr I know, but I don't like being used. Especially when I have my own bills to pay and mouths to feed.

Well done and yes there is a balance we must find.

We have to sift those in genuine need from the free loaders and that is naught but Justice. So you are to me, trying to find that just medium.

Thank you for your story and as you help those in need, that becomes it's own reward, as naught but good comes from help given to those in need.

Regards Tony

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Well done and yes there is a balance we must find.

We have to sift those in genuine need from the free loaders and that is naught but Justice. So you are to me, trying to find that just medium.

Thank you for your story and as you help those in need, that becomes it's own reward, as naught but good comes from help given to those in need.

Regards Tony

Someone once told me that the reward for helping others was the power to help others itself. Which eventually I realized made sense. It didn't at first.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Most of what Google shows us about that historic visit comes from Bahai sites. A dozen press clippings from a 239 day visitation is not much. I highly doubt that the average American was aware of his visit.

The Beatles one-time guru, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, had a far greater impact than your Abdulbaha. So did L. Ron Hubbard and Sun Myung Moon.

So, why bother posting?

Your Google search and your doubts have not uncovered the facts. Sorry no time to post sources for you, work calls.

If you want to know I posted the links to two books that have compiled the responses to the visits Abdul'baha made to America.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

All holier-than-thou comments are self-serving. Many men, and women, have made comments that led to their prosecution and death. Not all have been self-serving. Many have been in defense of Country and even in defense of plain folk.



In any case, you still have not clarified why The Bab was so closely followed by Balluhah. That makes little sense if God's plan is to send one Messenger for each "age". It seems more likely that a mortal, The Bab, tried to start a new religion. It made little progress so another mere mortal, Ballulha, jumped in and said "I am the Messenger".




ETA: If memory serves, Balluah also decreed that there would be no more Messengers for 1000 years, thereby ensuring his eternal glorification.

I am happy for you to see it as you choose to.

Regards Tony

 

[Sheldon]

Yes hundreds and hundreds of press clippings whose Audience did expand all across America and in those days, the majority did read the papers.

2 x books over 500 pages full of the news stories.

'The Apostle of Peace': A New Reference Book about Abdu'l-Baha - Baha'i Blog

Regards Tony

Have you ever heard of an argumentum ad populum fallacy?

Also a book cannot validate it's own claims, it has to cite evidence, or the Harry Potter novels would be evidence that wizardry was real.

News stories are notoriously unreliable, so unless there is corroborating evidence I'd be pretty dubious varying according to the source, and how extraordinary the claim is.

 

[ecco]

If you want to know I posted the links to two books that have compiled the responses to the visits Abdul'baha made to America.

Books about a Bahai's visit to America compiled and written by Bahai's is really not very impressive.

There are many books about Jones and Koresh and Hubbard. So what.

However, at this point I really no longer care. See ya in another thread.

 

[Sheldon]

What Abdul'baha said about himself was to clarify what everyone else was calling him.

They were calling him a Prophet , the return of Christ.

That seems like an argumentum ad populum fallacy to me, the number of people who believe something tell us nothing about the validity of the claim or belief. A consensus is only of value if it involves objective evidence and adherence to a rigorous objective method. At one point most people accepted we lived in a geocentric universe, but we don't.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Have you ever heard of an argumentum ad populum fallacy?

Also a book cannot validate it's own claims, it has to cite evidence, or the Harry Potter novels would be evidence that wizardry was real.

News stories are notoriously unreliable, so unless there is corroborating evidence I'd be pretty dubious varying according to the source, and how extraordinary the claim is.

All the references are posted in the books. The books are just quoting all the press clippings. They are books full of external evidence.

I doubt if there are free copies available to post the references.

Leave it to you, but most likely a refutation to this as well.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Books about a Bahai's visit to America compiled and written by Bahai's is really not very impressive.

There are many books about Jones and Koresh and Hubbard. So what.

However, at this point I really no longer care. See ya in another thread.

I give up. That comment is so not applicable to those books that it is sad.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That seems like an argumentum ad populum fallacy to me, the number of people who believe something tell us nothing about the validity of the claim or belief. A consensus is only of value if it involves objective evidence and adherence to a rigorous objective method. At one point most people accepted we lived in a geocentric universe, but we don't.

You have entirly missed the point.

Regards Tony

 

[Azrael Antilla]

That seems like an argumentum ad populum fallacy to me, the number of people who believe something tell us nothing about the validity of the claim or belief. A consensus is only of value if it involves objective evidence and adherence to a rigorous objective method. At one point most people accepted we lived in a geocentric universe, but we don't.

Billions of people could believe the Earth is flat, wouldnt change the fact that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. To repeat the premise. How could a logically consistent argument be posited to counter that undeniable truth? That numbers are irrelevant.

 

[Sheldon]

All the references are posted in the books. The books are just quoting all the press clippings. They are books full of external evidence.

Sorry, but all you have done is repeat your claim, press clippings are not reliable on their own, and you haven't offered any links to them or any corroborating evidence, what external evidence exactly? Again all you have offered is a bare claim, you seem to do this a lot.

You also didn't address your use of an argumentum ad populum fallacy.

You have entirly missed the point.

On the contrary, my point was that your posts used a known logical fallacy, I quoted it, and explained why it is a fallacy, you have simply dismissed it, without addressing it.
Here is your claim again, in response to a request for evidence.

What Abdul'baha said about himself was to clarify what everyone else was calling him.

They were calling him a Prophet , the return of Christ.

That is not evidence, it is a bare appeal to numbers. Who cares what anyone was calling him, or how many were calling him something, this is not credible evidence.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Sorry, but all you have done is repeat your claim, press clippings are not reliable on their own, and you haven't offered any links to them or any corroborating evidence, what external evidence exactly? Again all you have offered is a bare claim, you seem to do this a lot.

You also didn't address your use of an argumentum ad populum fallacy.


On the contrary, my point was that your posts used a known logical fallacy, I quoted it, and explained why it is a fallacy, you have simply dismissed it, without addressing it.
Here is your claim again, in response to a request for evidence.


That is not evidence, it is a bare appeal to numbers. Who cares what anyone was calling him, or how many were calling him something, this is not credible evidence.

Go back and see where it all started and what was being discussed. The conversation has gone from the point being made, which I even think was a reply to someone and something else.

So there is no point to this at all. I have no need to prove anything to you or provide anymore evidence than I have already done.

It is up to you to see it how you wish to.

Regards Tony

 

[Sheldon]

It could be seen that it is naught but a faith to take a stance that there is no God.

Could that be a coping mechanism, that those that choose this path will not be held accountable for their decisions, that they think they are free of the weight of this world, that they will live how they want to, die and that's it?

No true Scotsman fallacy, there is no evidence that theists are any more moral than atheists, this is an irrational prejudice theists trot out to decry people who don't share their beliefs, and you had the nerve to call my posts toxic? The idea of vicarious redemption is one of the most morally repugnant ideas I've ever encountered, and the idea that a decent kind generous and empathetic human can be tortured forever because they were unprepared to accept an unevidenced superstition or chose the wrong one, is almost as morally obscene and bankrupt, as the idea someone can commit any egregiously barbaric or immoral act, then spend an eternity of bliss because they recanted with genuine contrition at the end

Does this free a person from considering that there may be deeper moral or ethical responsibilities, when all we have to use as boundaries, are the materialistic trends?

Name one moral act a theist is capable of, that an atheist is not, excluding religious dogma?

So I see an Athiest can have Faith when they too transcend their own desires and serve others in preference of self.

Errant nonsense, I have worked for, given time to, and made finacial contributions to charities to help others because the world can only be a better place because of it, I do not have, nor did I need any vapid unevidenced faith to reason in this way.

So that is the debate, but is it really a debate?

I'd say not, it appears you're trying to peddle the usual theistic canard that atheists can't be moral, dressed up in an equally nonsensical claim atheists need faith.

 

[Sheldon]

I have no need to prove anything to you or provide anymore evidence than I have already done.

You haven't offered any objective evidence. Entirely subjective opinion isn't evidence, else I'd have to believe literally anything anyone chose to claim.

Go back and see where it all started and what was being discussed.

It's in the thread title. Atheism is the lack or absence of belief in any deity or deities, and I no more need faith for that, than I do to disbelieve in invisible unicorns, or anything else that is presented in the complete absence of any objective evidence.

 

[Sheldon]

Atheist : a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

Yes we know that is what an Atheist will say and I offered this quote in the OP

That's not just what atheists say, so that's a dishonest misrepresentation right there, it's the definition derived from common usage, and a cursory look at a dictionary demonstrates that.

"All humanity must obtain a livelihood by sweat of the brow and bodily exertion, at the same time seeking to lift the burden of others, striving to be the source of comfort to souls and facilitating the means of living."

It goes on to say that "This in itself is devotion to God".

That's a meaningless subjective claim, completely absent of any objective evidence. Hitchens's razor applied - slash...

I am just asking about the above actions, are they part of your life?

Not in any way you'd understand them apparently. Some of us don't need the threat of Hell, or the saccharine promise of heaven to realise some behaviours are deeply pernicious, and others help avoid or even prevent unnecessary suffering by helping the wellbeing of others. I don't need superstition, or vapid platitudes peppered with the word love, in order to reason this way.

If they are, then your actions are as faithful as mine.

Errant nonsense, but do please keep telling me what I think, that never stops being a compelling argument for belief in unevidenced archaic superstition.