Atheists: What would be evidence of God’s existence?

[Trailblazer]

And I always ask... Why don't we believe the Egyptian Gods or the Greek Gods? Same kind of stories.

Baha'is do not believe in those Gods because we only believe in the one true God.

“Our purpose in revealing these words is to show that the one true God hath, in His all-highest and transcendent station, ever been, and will everlastingly continue to be, exalted above the praise and conception of all else but Him. His creation hath ever existed, and the Manifestations of His Divine glory and the Day Springs of eternal holiness have been sent down from time immemorial, and been commissioned to summon mankind to the one true God. That the names of some of them are forgotten and the records of their lives lost is to be attributed to the disturbances and changes that have overtaken the world.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 174

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I already concluded that (1) God exists and there is evidence, because if there was no evidence God could not hold humans accountable for believing in Him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

Logical fallacies are not evidence.

 

[Trailblazer]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

Logical fallacies are not evidence.

I never said they were.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I never said they were.

Yes you did.

That there is someone or something that holds men accountable for their belief presumes a god to do so, yet you assert as evidence that there is someone who holds men accountable for their belief as proof that god exists, thus your "evidence" presumes the question; logical fallacy; begging the question.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Let’s see what happens when we rephrase the above argument to the following:

If the bible is true God exists, and, if God exists the bible is true.

The second "if" statement isn't valid. The existence of God wouldn't prove the Bible in and of itself.

... and in fact, you yourself have argued in this thread to God exists and that the Bible is "less correct" than the words of Baha'u'llah (i.e. that the Bible isn't entirely correct).

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes you did.

That there is someone or something that holds men accountable for their belief presumes a god to do so, yet you assert as evidence that there is someone who holds men accountable for their belief as proof that god exists, thus your "evidence" presumes the question; logical fallacy; begging the question.

I absolutely do not assert as evidence that there is someone who holds men accountable for their belief as proof that god exists. There is proof, but what you said that I said is not proof that God exists. The proof that God exists are His Manifestations.

“He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 49

All of the Manifestations of God were proof that God exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

The second "if" statement isn't valid. The existence of God wouldn't prove the Bible in and of itself.

That was not MY statement, it was a statement that man on the website made.
Good catch. I already pointed out to another atheist that the second IF statement is not valid.

If the bible is true God exists, and, if God exists the bible is true.

If the bible is true God exists, but even if God exists that does not mean the bible is true. If God exists, the bible could be either true or false.

... and in fact, you yourself have argued in this thread to God exists and that the Bible is "less correct" than the words of Baha'u'llah (i.e. that the Bible isn't entirely correct).

Yes, that is what I have argued, and I hold to it.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Let me quote you when you said:

I already concluded that (1) God exists and there is evidence, because if there was no evidence God could not hold humans accountable for believing in Him.

Therefore, "begging the question" as the conclusion that "God exists" is based on the premise that God "hold humans accountable for believing in Him"; thus you did, as far as I can tell, assert this as evidence.

Then you turn around and say that you didn't say what you said and said instead:

I absolutely do not assert as evidence that there is someone who holds men accountable for their belief as proof that god exists. There is proof, but what you said that I said is not proof that God exists. The proof that God exists are His Manifestations.

“He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 49

All of the Manifestations of God were proof tat God exists.

You are talking in circles.

 

[Trailblazer]

Let me quote you when you said:

Trailblazer said: I already concluded that (1) God exists and there is evidence, because if there was no evidence God could not hold humans accountable for believing in Him.

Therefore, "begging the question" as the conclusion that "God exists" is based on the premise that God "hold humans accountable for believing in Him"; thus you did, as far as I can tell, assert this as evidence.

Then you turn around and say that you didn't say what you said and said instead:

You are talking in circles.

Sorry I confused you and now I can see how that happened. Let's start over with what I originally said and I will explain what I meant by that.

Trailblazer said:

I already concluded that (1) God exists and there is evidence, because if there was no evidence God could not hold humans accountable for believing in Him.

What I meant by that is:
- God exists.
- There is evidence that God exists.
- If there was no evidence that God exists then God could not hold us accountable for believing that He exists because it would be unfair for God to expect us to believe He exists if God offered no evidence of His existence.

Thus my conclusion that "God exists" is not based on the premise that God "hold humans accountable for believing in Him." My conclusion that God exists is based upon the evidence that indicates that God exists.

I believe that the Manifestations of God (which I also refer to as Messengers of God) are the evidence that God offered as proof of His existence.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Bible is filled with fictional, metaphorical stories about God, but just because fictional stories were written about God that does not mean God is fictional. What it means is that the writers made stuff up . Baha'u'llah never had to make stuff up since He had knowledge of God.

Lots of the stories in the Bible are about God and God doing things. Did those things happen or are they metaphorical? Six day creation and walking and talking in the garden with Adam? Writing the Ten Commandments on stone tablets? Going before the Hebrews as a pillar of smoke? And on and on? Oh, and this God of theirs ordered the killing of woman and children in some of the cities he had the people invade. Is that something you believe that your God would do? I would hope not. That is why I think that this God in the Bible was the mythical warrior God of the Israelites. Here's a link...

Yahweh[a] was the national god of Ancient Israel.[1] His origins reach at least to the early Iron Age and likely to the Late Bronze Age.[2] In the oldest biblical literature he is a storm-and-warrior deity[3] who leads the heavenly army against Israel's enemies;[4] at that time the Israelites worshipped him alongside a variety of Canaanite gods and goddesses, including El, Asherah and Baal,[5] but in later centuries El and Yahweh became conflated and El-linked epithets such as El Shaddai came to be applied to Yahweh alone,[6] and other gods and goddesses such as Baal and Asherah were absorbed into the Yahwistic religion.[7]

Towards the end of the Babylonian captivity (6th century BCE), the very existence of foreign gods was denied, and Yahweh was proclaimed as the creator of the cosmos and the one true God of all the world.[8] During the Second Temple period, speaking the name of Yahweh in public became regarded as taboo.[9] Jews began to substitute the divine name with the word adonai (אֲדֹנָי‬), meaning "My Lords" but used as a singular like "Elohim", and after the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE the original pronunciation was forgotten.[10] Outside Judaism, Yahweh was frequently invoked in Graeco-Roman magical texts from the 2nd century BCE to the 5th century under the names Iao, Adonai, Sabaoth, and Eloai.[12]​

 

[CG Didymus]

On that website it says:
"Bahá’u’lláh referred to several historical figures as Manifestations. They include Adam, Noah, Zoroaster, Krishna, Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad. The Báb, as well as Himself, were included in this definition. Thus religious history is interpreted as a series of dispensations, where each Manifestation brings a somewhat broader and more advanced revelation, suited for the time and place in which it was expressed."

Unless you have actual Writings of Baha'u'llah in which He referred to these Prophets as Manifestations you cannot say that Baha'u'llah actually referred to them as Manifestations. https://bahaipedia.org is not even an official Baha'i website.

To my knowledge, Baha'u'llah never even referred to Buddha or Krishna at all, I am not sure about Zoroaster..

Here's another site...

Throughout the ages, humanity’s spiritual, intellectual and moral capacities have been cultivated by the Founders of the great religions, among them Abraham, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and—in more recent times—the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh.

These Figures are not simply ordinary people with a greater knowledge than others. Rather they are Manifestations of God,
​

Here's another...

The holy Manifestations Who have been the Sources or Founders of the various religious systems were united and agreed in purpose and teaching. Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh are one in spirit and reality
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 197-198​

And another...

"It can, therefore, be confidently stated that the teachings of the Faith name Krishna as a Manifestation of God. In light, however, of the other statements of the Guardian, in which he stresses the paucity of our information about the beginnings of Hinduism, we should be cautious not to assert the historical accuracy of specific stories related about Krishna. A similar case where allegorical statements and legends surround the figure of a known Manifestation of God is that of Adam." On behalf of the Universal House of Justice...

"The Adamic Cycle inaugurated 6000 years ago by the Manifestation of God called Adam is only one of the many bygone cycles. Bahá’u’lláh, as you say, is the culmination of the Adamic Cycle. (From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, March 13, 1986, in Lights of Guidance, no. 1683)​

Here's one that says Noah was a manifestation but in the quote it says "prophet"...

Noah was a Manifestation of God. "...consider that among the Prophets was Noah. When He was invested with the robe of Prophethood, and was moved by the Spirit of God to arise and proclaim His Cause, whoever believed in Him and acknowledged His Faith, was endowed with the grace of a new life." ( Bahá'u'lláh, Kitáb-i-Íqán, par. 162)​

But I don't believe Adam, Noah, Abraham or Moses were manifestations. Actually, probably none of the people listed accept Baha'u'llah. And with him, what I really believe is that he claimed to be a manifestation, but because he said some of these other people were too, I don't believe him.

 

[Trailblazer]

Lots of the stories in the Bible are about God and God doing things. Did those things happen or are they metaphorical?

It all depends upon the things. I doubt God did half of those things, probably not even one quarter of them, but since nobody can ever know, why bother wondering? Besides, the Bible is ancient history. I don't care what God did in the remote past, I only care what God is doing now, not that I can ever know that as nobody ca ever fathom the mystery of God and that is one reason I believe many of those stories were fictional.

“Wert thou to ponder in thine heart, from now until the end that hath no end, and with all the concentrated intelligence and understanding which the greatest minds have attained in the past or will attain in the future, this divinely ordained and subtle Reality, this sign of the revelation of the All-Abiding, All-Glorious God, thou wilt fail to comprehend its mystery or to appraise its virtue. Having recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding of that Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the futility of such efforts as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the created things, to fathom the mystery of the Living God, the Day Star of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This confession of helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every mind to make is in itself the acme of human understanding, and marketh the culmination of man’s development.” Gleanings, pp. 165-166

 

[Trailblazer]

Here's another site...

Throughout the ages, humanity’s spiritual, intellectual and moral capacities have been cultivated by the Founders of the great religions, among them Abraham, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Buddha, Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and—in more recent times—the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh.

These Figures are not simply ordinary people with a greater knowledge than others. Rather they are Manifestations of God,
​

Here's another...

The holy Manifestations Who have been the Sources or Founders of the various religious systems were united and agreed in purpose and teaching. Abraham, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad, the Báb and Bahá’u’lláh are one in spirit and reality
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 197-198​

And another...

"It can, therefore, be confidently stated that the teachings of the Faith name Krishna as a Manifestation of God. In light, however, of the other statements of the Guardian, in which he stresses the paucity of our information about the beginnings of Hinduism, we should be cautious not to assert the historical accuracy of specific stories related about Krishna. A similar case where allegorical statements and legends surround the figure of a known Manifestation of God is that of Adam." On behalf of the Universal House of Justice...

"The Adamic Cycle inaugurated 6000 years ago by the Manifestation of God called Adam is only one of the many bygone cycles. Bahá’u’lláh, as you say, is the culmination of the Adamic Cycle. (From a letter written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, March 13, 1986, in Lights of Guidance, no. 1683)​

Here's one that says Noah was a manifestation but in the quote it says "prophet"...

Noah was a Manifestation of God. "...consider that among the Prophets was Noah. When He was invested with the robe of Prophethood, and was moved by the Spirit of God to arise and proclaim His Cause, whoever believed in Him and acknowledged His Faith, was endowed with the grace of a new life." ( Bahá'u'lláh, Kitáb-i-Íqán, par. 162)​

But I don't believe Adam, Noah, Abraham or Moses were manifestations. Actually, probably none of the people listed accept Baha'u'llah. And with him, what I really believe is that he claimed to be a manifestation, but because he said some of these other people were too, I don't believe him.

The first website that you cited is from https://www.bahai.org/ which is The Official Website of the Worldwide Bahá’í Community, but the others are not official Baha'i Faith websites. I do not know where Bahai.org is getting their information about these individuals because I have not seen any Writings of Baha'u'llah that even mention Krishna or Buddha. This is a bit problematic for me.

However, Baha'u'llah did write about Adam, Noah, Abraham or Moses and He referred to them as Prophets.

Why don't you believe Adam, Noah, Abraham or Moses were Manifestations of God? Is that just your personal opinion or is it based upon what the Bible says about them? We all know how reliable the "Bible stories" are.

 

[Watchmen]

Whenever I say that Messengers of God are the evidence of God’s existence atheists say “that’s not evidence.”

So if “that’s not evidence” what would be evidence of God’s existence?

If God existed, where would we get the evidence? How would we get it?

As I see it there are only three possibilities:

1. God exists and there is evidence so we should look for the evidence.
2. God exists but there is no evidence so there is nothing to look for.
3. God does not exist and that is why there is no evidence.

I believe (1) God exists and there is evidence, because if there was no evidence God could not hold humans accountable for believing in Him. Why would God expect us to believe He exists and provide no evidence? That would be unfair as well as unreasonable.

That’s a silly question for atheists. The answer is there would be no evidence of god because god doesn’t exist. Atheists, by definition, do not believe in god, so how could they possibly identify any evidence of god?

 

[Trailblazer]

That’s a silly question for atheists. The answer is there would be no evidence of god because god doesn’t exist. Atheists, by definition, do not believe in god, so how could they possibly identify any evidence of god?

I meant that hypothetically.

If God existed, where would we get the evidence? How would we get it?

In other words, what would constitute evidence for God's existence were God to exist?

Atheists say that Messengers of God are not sufficient evidence of God's existence so what would be sufficient evidence?

 

[samtonga43]

I thought I should probably let this thread die because it nearly killed me answering all these posts but I told you I would be back as soon as I got caught up so here I am... You might be sorry I am back but I always try to keep my promises.

I never said that it would be an established truth just because I proved it to myself; I said it wouldn't be an established fact unless it could be proven as a fact that is widely accepted. However, if I proved it to myself by looking at the evidence it has been proven to me. Do you understand the difference?

I did not assume my religion was the truth; I investigated it and I came to believe it was the truth. I used the evidence to prove it to myself, can you think of another way for me to how if it is true or not?

I am making no claims because I have nothing to claim. Baha'u'llah made claims and I believed His claims after I looked at the evidence that proved to me that His claims were valid.

Evidence: anything that helps to prove that something is or is not true: EVIDENCE | definition in the Cambridge English Dictionary

To say that since I can prove anything to myself so I should not bother to look at the evidence and try to prove to myself that any religious belief is true is not logical because that would preclude me ever from knowing is any religious belief is true.

Of course I could make a mistake because humans are fallible so they are prone to make mistakes, but that does not mean that everything we do is a mistake. To say that since there is nothing preventing me from not making mistakes so I should not do anything because I might make a mistake is not logical. If I am so afraid making a mistake that I don't make any choices how could I ever learn anything?

All that said, what is unreasonable is to expect other people to prove to us that a religious belief is true. When atheists say I have the burden of proof to prove to them that my religion is true as if that is unreasonable, because it is not my job to prove anything to anyone else UNLESS I am trying to convince them it is true. Burden of proof applies to law because a prosecutor is trying to prove that the defendant is guilty of a crime. I am not trying to prove that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God so I have no burden.

You cannot compare a belief about the physical reality that is falsifiable to a religious belief that is not falsifiable. It has been proven that the earth is not flat as a scientific fact, so that means if fat earthers still believe that the earth is flat they are denying the evidence, just like Trumpsters are denying the evidence that clearly proved that Biden won the election. There will never be any evidence that proves the earth is flat because the earth is round.

This is what you and other atheists do not understand: Religion is not science so religion cannot be tested and verified like scientific theories that later established truths. That is why religion can never become an established fact that everyone will believe is true, not unless God intervened on earth and did something to make everyone know it is true. In other words, there is no test for a religion that will prove a religion is true to everyone. all we have are our rational minds to make that determination, but everyone who uses their rational mind will not come to the same conclusions because people are all very different in how they think and assess information.
The way we prove that to ourselves is by looking at all the evidence tat will help us determines if the alleged Messenger was making a true claim. It is impossible to prove it as a fact that everyone will believe -- and that is one reason I never even bother to try to prove it to anyone -- but it is not impossible to prove it to ourselves.

Hypothetically speaking, let;s a=-say that a man such as Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God. What kind of evidence would you expect to have in order to prove that?

A logical argument cannot be used to prove a man was a Messenger of God and conclude that God exists because it can never be proven that God exists or that God sent Messengers, so atheists should give up the whole idea of telling me to prove my religion is true with a logical argument. However, just because a religion cannot be proven true with a logical argument that does not mean that it is not true; it only means it is not subject to being proven with a logical argument. Do you understand what I mean?

But I am not presenting a logical argument for my belief as I said above; I am just saying that I believe it is true based upon the evidence. One can only prove a belief is true to themselves and I already explained why.

I am sorry you cannot understand my logic. If God sent a Messengers as proof of His existence then there is not going to be any other proof forthcoming so we have two choices -- either look at the Messengers or decide that it does not matter if God exists and be a confirmed atheist. To me it makes logical sense to look at the Messenger who claimed to get the message from God, but only if he meets certain minimum criteria.

I guess this is where faith comes in, but it does not have to be blind faith; it can be a reason-based faith if it is faith supported by evidence. All I can say is what worked for me, I cannot explain anyone else's thinking process and how they came to believe in Baha'u'llah. For me, once I looked at all the evidence for Baha'u'llah I believed His claim that God spoke to Him because in my mind there would be no other explanation for what He accomplished on His mission and what He wrote, and there would be no other explanation for a thriving world religion that was established in His name. That is not to mention all the Bible prophecies that were fulfilled by His coming, including the fact that the Baha'i World Centre is on top of Mt. Carmel, fulfilling many Old Testament prophecies.

There is no reason to think that God would or should intervene and speak to everyone directly when God can communicate through one Messenger in every age who can pass the messages along to everyone. I know all the atheist objections to Messengers since I have been discussing this with atheists or nine years, but because I have discussed this so much I already have a logical argument for my position and it is permanently seared into my memory!

 

[CG Didymus]

Why don't you believe Adam, Noah, Abraham or Moses were Manifestations of God? Is that just your personal opinion or is it based upon what the Bible says about them? We all know how reliable the "Bible stories" are.

I've mentioned my reasons several times. The Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses in the Bible had faults. None of them claimed to be a manifestation. Jews don't claim them to be manifestations. Moses is the closest one and he killed a guy and as the leader of the Israelites wandering in the wilderness he did something that upset God, so God didn't allow him to enter the promised land.

Definitely Baha'i go by different stories about these people. Maybe it is from Islam, I don't know. But what I really think about all of them is that the stories are probably myth. Which goes well with what Baha'is believe when they say that many of the stories are literal and historical. But then I think that they were taught and believed to be literally true, whereas Baha'is say they are metaphorical. Like metaphorical plaques convinced the Pharaoh to let the Hebrews go? God metaphorically parted the water and then closed them metaphorically back up when the Egyptian chariots were crossing? Or, the whole story is just plain old fictional myth.

 

[Trailblazer]

I've mentioned my reasons several times. The Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses in the Bible had faults. None of them claimed to be a manifestation. Jews don't claim them to be manifestations. Moses is the closest one and he killed a guy and as the leader of the Israelites wandering in the wilderness he did something that upset God, so God didn't allow him to enter the promised land.

So you believe what the Bible says rather than what Baha'u'llah wrote. Fine, but don't expect me to believe it over what Baha'u'llah wrote. Baha'u'llah explained why even though Moses killed that man He was sinless in the eyes of God. That is in The Kitab-i-Iqan.

I do not care what you want to call Prophets and Messengers of God. Manifestation is just another word that means that God was manifested in these men. I believe that even if you don't.

Baha’u’llah sternly warned us never to make any distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause because they all arise to proclaim the same religion, since there is only one eternal religion of God. Baha’u’llah wrote that the works and acts of all the Manifestations of God were all ordained by God, a reflection of His Will and Purpose, meaning that all the religions are equally true and all the Messengers are equal in stature.

“Beware, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any distinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if ye be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured, moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoever they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whoso maketh the slightest possible difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 59-60

The Manifestations of God all have a distinct body and soul but they share in the same Holy Spirit of God. They are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God and they all proclaim the same Faith of God. Baha'u'llah said they are to be regarded as one soul and the same person since they are one on purpose.

“The Bearers of the Trust of God are made manifest unto the peoples of the earth as the Exponents of a new Cause and the Revealers of a new Message. Inasmuch as these Birds of the celestial Throne are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God, and as they all arise to proclaim His irresistible Faith, they, therefore, are regarded as one soul and the same person. For they all drink from the one Cup of the love of God, and all partake of the fruit of the same Tree of Oneness.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 50

 

[CG Didymus]

So you believe what the Bible says rather than what Baha'u'llah wrote. Fine, but don't expect me to believe it over what Baha'u'llah wrote. Baha'u'llah explained why even though Moses killed that man He was sinless in the eyes of God. That is in The Kitab-i-Iqan.

I do not care what you want to call Prophets and Messengers of God. Manifestation is just another word that means that God was manifested in these men. I believe that even if you don't.

What is the Baha'i definition of a "manifestation"? Did Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses fit that description? Then, where did Baha'u'llah get his alternative stories about them? The Quran or this is new information about them from God? Here's one about Noah...

Among the Prophets was Noah. For nine hundred and fifty years He prayerfully exhorted His people and summoned them to the haven of security and peace. None, however, heeded His call. Each day they inflicted on His blessed person such pain and suffering that no one believed He could survive. How frequently they denied Him, how malevolently they hinted their suspicion against Him! Thus it hath been revealed: “And as often as a company of His people passed by Him, they derided Him. To them He said: ‘Though ye scoff at us now, we will scoff at you hereafter even as ye scoff at us. In the end ye shall know.’”3 Long afterward, He several times promised victory to His companions and fixed the hour thereof. But when the hour struck, the divine promise was not fulfilled. This caused a few among the small number of His followers to turn away from Him, and to this testify the records of the best-known books. These you must certainly have perused; if not, undoubtedly you will. Finally, as stated in books and traditions, there remained with Him only forty or seventy-two of His followers. At last from the depth of His being He cried aloud: “Lord! Leave not upon the land a single dweller from among the unbelievers.”​

Then in the Bible...

Genesis 6:9 This is the account of Noah and his family.

Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God. 10 Noah had three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth.

11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. 13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. 14 So make yourself an ark...​

It goes on for three chapters.

 

[Trailblazer]

What is the Baha'i definition of a "manifestation"? Did Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses fit that description? Then, where did Baha'u'llah get his alternative stories about them?

Baha'u'llah got His knowledge from God, not from reading the Bible.

“O KING! I was but a man like others, asleep upon My couch, when lo, the breezes of the All-Glorious were wafted over Me, and taught Me the knowledge of all that hath been. This thing is not from Me, but from One Who is Almighty and All-Knowing. And He bade Me lift up My voice between earth and heaven, and for this there befell Me what hath caused the tears of every man of understanding to flow.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 57