• 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!

Ella S.

Dispassionate Goth
Thank you for participating, I assume you will now move on from our kindergarten chat.

Have a great Gregorian New Year.

Regards Tony

Happy New Year to you as well! Despite my terseness, I am thankful for the chance this thread has provided to interact with people who disagree with me. I appreciate the opportunity, but I do think it's gone a bit long for me.
 

TransmutingSoul

Veteran Member
Premium Member
And that is just dogma. You are claiming in essence that a person has to believe to believe. That is only circular reasoning and an indication of a lack of evidence.

He is not saying that, in my opinion. He is saying investigate. As I just said, it is understandable if you don't do that.

This OP was not about proof, it is about what constitutes evidence, that will then provide the proofs.

An example of the first aspect, which is evidence of "the person", this can be considered in this manner when the evidence is pursued for a proof.

The proof of a great leader is that he has subjects that attest to the Justice, mercy and compassion of that leader, and in their lives practice the demonstrative legacy of that leader.

So, in history who have been the leaders that have the greatest following of people that see that in their leader and have left a demonstrative legacy to live by?

We can offer that it is obvious that Jesus and Muhammad have proved they have been the greatest leaders?

Regards Tony
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
You're a great help. We don't shun dissenters. But you are too confused to realize that. Pardon me for saying that, but you demonstrate that repeatedly as far as I'm concerned. The Prophet's family tried to seize control of the Baha'i Faith for themselves, as they were envious and ambitious. There was no power struggle, the Covenant easily won out. There were only a very few who split off. @John53, note what I'm saying here.
Gee, thanks. I try to be helpful. Thanks for noticing that. That I try to fill in the gaps that Baha'is refuse to talk about. And it is confusing. Maybe I didn't word it in a way that Baha'is like, but Baha'is still shun those that have been declared "covenant-breakers". And they have a lack of ability to bring peace and unity to these discussions. The Baha'i message is essentially, our prophet is from God and everything he says is the truth. And we know that, because he said so.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
I had a similar experience. Of course Christians will tell me that mine was not spiritual either. And they were probably right. It is a pity that they cannot think that through to its logical conclusion.
Like some Catholics have a vision of Mary. Baha'is have visions of Abdul Baha. And Pentecostals get filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues. Real good proof. If it's real.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
You must see through your own eyes, it appears you allowed others to taint your experiences.
We don't live in a vacuum. Ideas about religion, God and spiritual things are all around us. Why only the Baha'i interpretation? Why only the fundy Christian interpretation? Of course, Baha'is believe this is a new message and has corrected all the false beliefs that have accumulated over time. But still, for some people, it is only a religion that is making a lot of assumptions, God is real, and Baha'u'llah is his manifestation for this day and age. God being real depends on Baha'u'llah being a manifestation. That's something that we can all look at the claims and evidence, and I like to add, the prophecies, to see if he fulfills those things he claims.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I've tried to understand that. If I'm right he's saying, be open to all evidence and be fair (justice) in your conclusions. Sounds good to me. On the other hand, from the tablet, "That seeker must, at all times, put his trust in God, must renounce the peoples of the earth, must detach himself from the world of dust, and cleave unto Him Who is the Lord of Lords." seems to assume a belief in god.
I like how you think, logically. Yes, that passage does assume that the person reading it already believes in God.
That seeker might not already believe in Baha'u'llah, but he believes in God.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
The point of the thread is pretty clear to me.

"Here's my evidence."
"That's not evidence."
"Yes it is, you're just too arrogant, imperceptive, closed-minded, and stubborn to accept it."
"No, it isn't, you're being ridiculous."

Then just repeat the last two steps over and over again in an endless chain of "Yes it is," "No it isn't," "Yes it is," etc. It's like arguing with a Kindergartener. This thread isn't to generate any productive discussion. It's to attack atheists for not being gullible.

What a waste of cyberspace.
Unfortunately attempts to bet them to define their God or even define what they mean by "evidence" have not been answered. So it appears that we have believers in woo woo that will make claims but not support them.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Like some Catholics have a vision of Mary. Baha'is have visions of Abdul Baha. And Pentecostals get filled with the Holy Spirit and speak in tongues. Real good proof. If it's real.
I was impressed when it happened, but over time I realized that it was something I could not explain and therefore could not be evidence for anything.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You always say what is not evidence. Maybe you should say exactly what would be evidence.

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

You probably will not accept my definition. That is why I ask others for theirs. Quite often they do not have one because they do not understand the term. I can define scientific evidence quite easily. But I have never seen believers in woo woo define what they mean by evidence.

One thing to remember is that evidence needs the ability to cut both ways. And that is why believers probably cannot define it. For them there is only belief. They cannot properly test what they believe in.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
This OP was not about proof, it is about what constitutes evidence, that will then provide the proofs.

An example of the first aspect, which is evidence of "the person", this can be considered in this manner when the evidence is pursued for a proof.

The proof of a great leader is that he has subjects that attest to the Justice, mercy and compassion of that leader, and in their lives practice the demonstrative legacy of that leader.

So, in history who have been the leaders that have the greatest following of people that see that in their leader and have left a demonstrative legacy to live by?

We can offer that it is obvious that Jesus and Muhammad have proved they have been the greatest leaders?

Regards Tony
It demonstrated a lack of knowledge of what evidence is.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I was thinking more along the line of even the more recent ones. They still have outdated beliefs about sexual morality that they cannot support. They amount to "gays are wrong because God said so". And the same goes towards premarital sex. "You can't enjoy yourself because God says so" when mismatched sexual desire is one of the main reasons that marriages fail.
If we believe in God we believe that God sets the standards for sexual morality, "God says so" is all we need.
Mismatched sexual desire is not one of the main reasons that marriages fail.

The Top Five Reasons People Divorce
  • INCOMPATIBILITY/ TOO MUCH CONFLICT. Opposites attract. ...
  • LACK OF COMMITMENT. Marriage is work. ...
  • BAD COMMUNICATION. All relationships thrive on communication, be it romantic, or platonic. ...
  • INFIDELITY/ EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIRS. ...
  • FINANCIAL PROBLEMS.
Jul 6, 2021

The Top Five Reasons Marriages Fail and People Get Divorced
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
That is just avoiding the complexity of the reply given.

Simply put if Nature put together all the laws that govern creation, then nature is smarter than any human,
The laws are part of energy itself, there is nothing smart about it. You are anthropomorphizing nature. This is a common religious mistake.

as we are not able to create, only manipulate the natural laws already in place and evolving from the founding laws of nature.
We humans are part of nature, not gods. So what you describe it quite normal.

This is a rational and logical proof of an intelligent behind creation.
No it isn't.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
If we believe in God we believe that God sets the standards for sexual morality, "God says so" is all we need.
Mismatched sexual desire is not one of the main reasons that marriages fail.

The Top Five Reasons People Divorce
  • INCOMPATIBILITY/ TOO MUCH CONFLICT. Opposites attract. ...
  • LACK OF COMMITMENT. Marriage is work. ...
  • BAD COMMUNICATION. All relationships thrive on communication, be it romantic, or platonic. ...
  • INFIDELITY/ EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIRS. ...
  • FINANCIAL PROBLEMS.
Jul 6, 2021

The Top Five Reasons Marriages Fail and People Get Divorced
You can always shop for a site that gives you the answers that you want with this sor tof question. And 1,2 and 4 in your list could all be attributed to differences in sexual desire. Meanwhile this site puts it directly in number 4 out of 10:

Why Marriages Fail: Top 10 Reasons | Divorce.com
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
It is not up to me to provide the evidence. That is up to the people that claim that it exists.
That's right. Baha'u'llah made the claims so it was up to Him to provide the evidence.
It is not up to the Baha'is to provide the evidence since we are not the ones who made the claims.
We are only believers who believe in the claims because we looked at the evidence that supports the claims.
Anyone who wants to know if the claims are true has to look at the evidence for themselves.
 
Top