Baha'i faith is not blind faith.

[Trailblazer]

If you learned that God existed, wouldn't that sort of change things a bit? That would mean that around half to 2/3 the worlds population would be living in sin and not as God instructed.

No, it'd be more like 100%.

 

[Trailblazer]

What if there is only one God, seen and understood from different P.O.V by past prophets? So their teaching made the foundation for new religions.

Makes sense to me, but of course I am a Baha'i.

 

[ppp]

You mean many atheists.

Your prejudices are showing. It's pretty common for Christians to say that you have to accept first. Especially among the evangelical protestants.

 

[Trailblazer]

I didn't think the Baha'i God threw anyone in hell.

That's true.

 

[Nimos]

That is a good definition of blind faith. However, some believers have a 'reason' for their faith so it is not blind.

That is a perfectly valid position, especially if those atheists don't have a 'reason' to believe that they could win (that God exists).

Again, that is a perfectly valid position.

Basically it comes down to whether one have a good reason for it.

Everyone can find a reason for something if they want, I mean Hitler probably also had his reasons for why he thought the Jews ought to be killed.

But you are right, that not all reason, even if they bad or unjustified are necessarily a bad thing, if it result in something positive. But if we are talking purely rationality and logic as being what we measure against, then blind faith is not good.

And honestly I don't think this is the motivation for most religious people anyway for why they believe.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your prejudices are showing. It's pretty common for Christians to say that you have to accept first. Especially among the evangelical protestants.

No, I am not prejudiced against atheists.
I was not referring to who accepts what first. I was referring to who says religions are blindly followed.
Many atheists seem to think all religions are blindly followed without asking questions

 

[Trailblazer]

Basically it comes down to whether one have a good reason for it.

But then we have to define what is 'a 'good reason' to believe in God and that is very subjective.

 

[Trailblazer]

And honestly I don't think this is the motivation for most religious people anyway for why they believe.

Neither do I.

 

[Trailblazer]

These quotes indicate that Bahais have a normal hell with hell-fire.

No, Baha'is do not have a hell with hell-fire. Hell is defined as a state of the soul that is distant from God and heaven is nearness to God.
I'm not sure where I will end up but I have lots of work to do if I am going to make it to heaven.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are quoting Wikipedia and writings of John WS. Hatcher (4) and Farnaz Masaumian (5). I am quoting the words of Bahaollah and Bab themselves.

but without knowing the Baha'i definition of hell.

 

[Trailblazer]

It has been freed from a world of sorrow, grief and trials to live in a world of unending bliss and joy. The phenomenal and physical have been abandoned in order that it may attain the opportunities of the ideal and spiritual.

With all due respect, why would anyone want to be close to a God that designed a world of sorrow, grief and trials that we had to live in till we die? Abdu'l-Baha tries to side-skirt that and I don't like that.

 

[Trailblazer]

one from Bahaullah himself...
"It is incumbent upon everyone to firmly adhere to God’s straight Path. Were He to pronounce the right to be the left or the south to be the north, He speaketh the truth and there is no doubt of it."
This clearly prescribes blind adherence to dogma, even if it seems nonsensical.

No, that is not blind adherence, we adhere out of choice with our eyes wide open.
That passage means that whatever God revels is the very truth, even if it sounds nonsensical to us.

 

[Trailblazer]

But Bahaullah himself said that you must follow god's pronouncements, even if they make no sense and contradict what is existing, factual knowledge, and you must have no doubt.
That is the definition of "blind faith".

No, that is not what Baha'u'llah said, that is what you think he meant according to something you read.

 

[ppp]

I was not referring to who accepts what first. I was referring to who says religions are blindly followed.

I was too. Accepting that something is true before receiving evidence is blindly following.

Many atheists seem to think all religions are blindly followed without asking questions

One can ask questions and still blindly follow. The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yikes!
"Meet the new god
Same as the old god"

He is the same old God, with a new message.

 

[Trailblazer]

I was too. Accepting that something is true before receiving evidence is blindly following.

That's true, but what is evidence to some people is not evidence to others.

One can ask questions and still blindly follow. The two are not mutually exclusive.

That is also true, but usually the believers who blindly follow do not ask questions.

 

[ppp]

That's true, but what is evidence to some people is not evidence to others.

That is sophistry. If you cannot demonstrate an actual causal connection between your supposed evidence and your claim, then it is not evidence. If your supposed evidence leads in multiple directions then it is not evidence.

That is also true, but usually the believers who blindly follow do not ask questions.

Again, false.

 

[ppp]

@Trailblazer
optimistic - disposed to take a favorable view of events or conditions and to expect the most favorable outcome.

 

[Trailblazer]

@Trailblazer
optimistic - disposed to take a favorable view of events or conditions and to expect the most favorable outcome.

That's right.

 

[Aupmanyav]

but without knowing the Baha'i definition of hell.

Who created the new definition of hell? Abdul Baha? Shoghi?
Hell with hell-fire as defined by Bahaollah and Bab seem to be different (kindly refer to my post with their quotes).