God Proof - Take 1

[Truly Enlightened]

Okay, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I had a misunderstanding of what the word claim actually means.A claim does not require proof. I looked up the definition of “claim” because Penguin was saying I was making a claim, and I can see that “claim” if the correct word, given the definition.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof. https://www.google.com/search

Note that it says “typically” which means that there might be evidence or proof, but that is not usually the case.

Baha’u’llah made the claim. I believe His claim is true.

Baha’u’llah explained how we are supposed to establish the truth of His claim. We are to examine three things:

1. His own Self (His character);
2. His Revelation (everything that surrounds His Mission on earth);
3. His words (His Writings).

You said: “Evidence uses facts and data to indicate proof or truth. Knowledge claims are all subject to fact-checking.” All of the above (1-3) are subject to fact-checking.

I have told you myriad times that I have evidence (facts and data) that support my beliefs, but I do not have proof that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. I have objective evidence that indicates that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God because I have facts and data (1-3 above), but I do not have proof. Nobody can prove that anyone got messages from God, only the Messenger knows that. We either choose to believe His claim or not.

When I looked up the definition of the word "claim", do you know what I was going to add to my post? I was going to add, "that you would use the word 'typically' to exploit, to avoid fully admitting that you were wrong. You have proven to me that I also have the gift of prophesy. This is just more evidence that demonstrates how much you distort the meaning of words, by manipulating the words within the word's definition, to make the original word agree with your narrative. This is also a fallacy. Belief is implicit in the utterance of a claim. Unless of course, you normally claim things that you don't believe in.

Why were there no red flags when you were told how you should establish truth? Why were there no red flags when the search area was limited to in-house and other approved materials only? The life of Baha'u'llah, including his childhood, strength and weaknesses, or his personal mission(Mother Teresa), are all irrelevant. The only thing that matters is supporting your belief that he is a Messenger of God. For that evidence you need to extend your list.

4. Any extraordinary evidence that can supports the existence of the supernatural, a Demigod, or a Messenger of a God(prophesies, or any supernatural paranormal activities, miracles, etc.).

I have told you myriad times that I have evidence (facts and data) that support my beliefs, but I do not have proof that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. I have objective evidence that indicates that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God because I have facts and data (1-3 above), but I do not have proof. Nobody can prove that anyone got messages from God, only the Messenger knows that. We either choose to believe His claim or not.

Again you are obfuscating. You do not have any objective evidence to justify or indicate, that Baha'u'llah is a Messenger of a God. The character, or how any human being has lived their lives, can never equate to becoming a Demigod, superhuman, or a Messenger of a God. That is a fallacy. You also have no evidence or rational reason to justify worshiping any human being. Dead or alive. So what are the extraordinary facts and data that would indicate proof?

Since you don't present any factual or rational argument for your beliefs, then your beliefs are only conceptual, not perceptual. My beliefs are self-evident and intuitive, not questionable and dubious. Also, we are not talking about whether someone had received any mail yesterday or not, we are talking about someone receiving messages from a God. So, please keep this in the proper perspective.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

It is natural for people to form opinions about other people they talk to. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. However, one should not state one’s opinions about others as if they were facts, because nobody can know a person better than they know themselves. Moreover, we might have an opinion about someone that is later proven completely wrong.

So, maybe you should start asking yourself, why do you have concerns about me, or are your concerns about something else?

I addressed all of this in the previous post. I see no reason to repeat myself.

In short, I have no proof (by the definitions I listed) because I cannot establish as a fact that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God or that God exists. All I have is the evidence that indicates that (to me).

Why am I obligated to list all the facts and data on a forum? People have been enjoined by Baha’u’llah to do an independent investigation of truth. However, per request by @ecco I listed two predictions that Baha’u’llah made that later came to pass and I posted the link to a book that has 30 predictions He made and the explanations of how they later came to pass. Those are on the thread entitled Is atheism a religion?

I agree, but truth about God, if it exists, is far too precious to miss out on.

Why am I obligated to list all the facts and data on a forum? People have been enjoined by Baha’u’llah to do an independent investigation of truth. However, per request by @ecco I listed two predictions that Baha’u’llah made that later came to pass and I posted the link to a book that has 30 predictions He made and the explanations of how they later came to pass. Those are on the thread entitled Is atheism a religion?

Why? Because you are the one making the claims. If you can't show it, you don't know it. If you can't prove it, then you can't use it. You have not presented ONE piece of evidence(facts and data), not one. The foretold prophesies you presented to "ecco", are cryptic guesses and opinions at best. There is no level of specificity in the use of who, what, where, when, why, and how. These all must be inclusive and consistent within the prediction, to be valid. Prophesies must be objectively verifiable. This avoids only seeing what we want to see. A true prophet can never be wrong. Has the Baha'u'llah ever been wrong?

I disagree with you. I think that people tend to know you much better than you know yourself. In fact your character is usually represented by the friends you keep. Confidence, strength, intelligence, wisdom, happiness, and other attributes, are what others see in you, that you may not see in yourself. Experiments have consistently demonstrated that your idea of self is closely linked to how others respond to your idea of self. If you believe that you are smart, and all others respond as if you are stupid, eventually you will also believe the same as others believe. It is the positive and negative feedback that you receive from others that determine your conception of self image. This is because we can't see ourselves from outside of ourselves, and that we are still social animals. We constantly need these social cues to validate our self image.

I have no concerns about who you are, personally. Your personality seems quite clear to me. But I do have concerns about what you say, and how you say it. Do you encourage children to accept unfalsifiable claims about superhumans, prophets, and Gods? What is your justification to try to indoctrinate anyone with unfalsifiable claims. If you want to believe in elves, fairies, Gods, Messengers, or that the supernatural or paranormal exists, that is your right. But before you try to indoctrinate others, shouldn't you make sure that your subjective beliefs are objectively true and falsifiable first? Or do you care at all?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why were there no red flags when you were told how you should establish truth? Why were there no red flags when the search area was limited to in-house and other approved materials only? The life of Baha'u'llah, including his childhood, strength and weaknesses, or his personal mission (Mother Teresa), are all irrelevant. The only thing that matters is supporting your belief that he is a Messenger of God. For that evidence you need to extend your list.

4. Any extraordinary evidence that can supports the existence of the supernatural, a Demigod, or a Messenger of a God (prophesies, or any supernatural paranormal activities, miracles, etc.).

Nobody told me how to establish truth. I figured it out by myself. I read books that were not in-house as well as the authoritative Writings of the Baha’i Faith.

What is irrelevant to you is relevant to me. We humans are all different. I have a long enough list of categories of evidence and all of it points in one direction. Supernatural evidence is not important to me, even though Baha’u’llah did miracles I know of.

Again you are obfuscating. You do not have any objective evidence to justify or indicate, that Baha'u'llah is a Messenger of a God. The character, or how any human being has lived their lives, can never equate to becoming a Demigod, superhuman, or a Messenger of a God. That is a fallacy. You also have no evidence or rational reason to justify worshiping any human being. Dead or alive. So what are the extraordinary facts and data that would indicate proof?

I am not obfuscating. I am just being honest about what I have and what I do not have. I do have evidence that indicates to me that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. That evidence will not indicate the same thing to everyone because it will be interpreted differently since we all interpret evidence differently.

To me, the Writings of Baha’u’llah alone are extraordinary evidence. Obviously not everyone will view them the same way because humans are all different.

I never said that the character and the life alone are proof; they are just part of the evidence.

I do not worship any human being. I worship only God.

Since you don't present any factual or rational argument for your beliefs, then your beliefs are only conceptual, not perceptual. My beliefs are self-evident and intuitive, not questionable and dubious. Also, we are not talking about whether someone had received any mail yesterday or not, we are talking about someone receiving messages from a God. So, please keep this in the proper perspective.

I have facts and I have rational arguments that support my beliefs. I would not believe in any religion based upon emotion. My beliefs are self-evident and intuitive to me, not questionable or dubious. Obviously you view them differently. It will always be that way because humans are all different.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why? Because you are the one making the claims. If you can't show it, you don't know it. If you can't prove it, then you can't use it.

That is not even logical. I can know it and choose not to show it. I am not trying to prove anything, I have said that many times. So there is nothing to use.

You have not presented ONE piece of evidence (facts and data), not one. The foretold prophesies you presented to "ecco", are cryptic guesses and opinions at best. There is no level of specificity in the use of who, what, where, when, why, and how. These all must be inclusive and consistent within the prediction, to be valid. Prophesies must be objectively verifiable. This avoids only seeing what we want to see. A true prophet can never be wrong. Has the Baha'u'llah ever been wrong?

I am not obligated to present facts and data to anyone because people can find those themselves. But that does not mean that facts and data do not exist. The predictions Baha’u’llah made were never wrong. Prophecies do not require any level of specificity to be accurate; you are the one who requires that. Prophets do not reveal who, what, where, when, why, and how. Some prophecies are specific, some are not, but they all came to pass.

I disagree with you. I think that people tend to know you much better than you know yourself.

I disagree with that. If someone is really lacking in self-awareness somebody might be able to see things in them they cannot see, but they do not know them better than they know themselves.

In fact your character is usually represented by the friends you keep. Confidence, strength, intelligence, wisdom, happiness, and other attributes, are what others see in you, that you may not see in yourself.

It is true that others might see things in us that we cannot see in ourselves, but that does not mean they know us better than we know ourselves, especially if they do not even know us very well. I think I see things in my coworker she probably does not see, but that is because I do not think she is very aware that certain things are even problematic. From my perspective they are but from her perspective they are not. We are very different in our beliefs and values. She could never understand why I live as I do, but I understand some reasons why she lives as she does; maybe she does too, I don’t really know. I see certain things in her but overall she knows herself better than I do since there is so much I do not know.

Experiments have consistently demonstrated that your idea of self is closely linked to how others respond to your idea of self. If you believe that you are smart, and all others respond as if you are stupid, eventually you will also believe the same as others believe. It is the positive and negative feedback that you receive from others that determine your conception of self image. This is because we can't see ourselves from outside of ourselves, and that we are still social animals. We constantly need these social cues to validate our self image.

That might be true for a lot of people but that is too bad because we should not care what others think of us as long as we know that we are living according to what we believe is moral and good. If our self image is determined by what other people think is us that shows we do not have very good boundaries between ourselves and others, that we are not our own person. People with low self-esteem typically think that it matters what others think about their physical appearance. That is very sad that their whole self image is wrapped up in how they look physically. I need no social cues to validate my self-image because it comes from within. I know who I am, the good and the bad. Nobody needs to tell me what my character defects are. I am very aware of them and because I am aware I work on them constantly. I am my worst critic but I do not see that as necessarily bad unless I am too hard on myself.

I have no concerns about who you are, personally. Your personality seems quite clear to me. But I do have concerns about what you say, and how you say it. Do you encourage children to accept unfalsifiable claims about superhumans, prophets, and Gods? What is your justification to try to indoctrinate anyone with unfalsifiable claims. If you want to believe in elves, fairies, Gods, Messengers, or that the supernatural or paranormal exists, that is your right. But before you try to indoctrinate others, shouldn't you make sure that your subjective beliefs are objectively true and falsifiable first? Or do you care at all?

I do not encourage anyone to believe in anything. I do not try to indoctrinate anyone. I speak when spoken to and answer posts. I sometimes respond to post if I have something to contribute. I have no interest in convincing anyone of anything I believe. I have probably said that to you at least a dozen times. I do not need any validation for my beliefs from other people. I know what I believe and why. I do not care what other people believe or disbelieve.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Nobody told me how to establish truth. I figured it out by myself. I read books that were not in-house as well as the authoritative Writings of the Baha’i Faith.

What is irrelevant to you is relevant to me. We humans are all different. I have a long enough list of categories of evidence and all of it points in one direction. Supernatural evidence is not important to me, even though Baha’u’llah did miracles I know of.

I am not obfuscating. I am just being honest about what I have and what I do not have. I do have evidence that indicates to me that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. That evidence will not indicate the same thing to everyone because it will be interpreted differently since we all interpret evidence differently.

To me, the Writings of Baha’u’llah alone are extraordinary evidence. Obviously not everyone will view them the same way because humans are all different.

I never said that the character and the life alone are proof; they are just part of the evidence.

I do not worship any human being. I worship only God.

I have facts and I have rational arguments that support my beliefs. I would not believe in any religion based upon emotion. My beliefs are self-evident and intuitive to me, not questionable or dubious. Obviously you view them differently. It will always be that way because humans are all different.

Like I've said before, it is frustrating to converse with anyone that keeps denying even their own words. Your statement was;

Baha’u’llah explained how we are supposed to establish the truth of His claim. We are to examine three things:

1. His own Self (His character);
2. His Revelation (everything that surrounds His Mission on earth);
3. His words (His Writings).

How can you establish the truth about anything, if it needs to be explained to you how to establish it? Do you know why the Baha'i's were persecuted in many Middle-Eastern countries? Do you know its European and Russian origins? Why do you avoid unfavorable statements by enemies of the faith. Why not just expose their lies, and not avoid them? Do you know why there were so much in-house fighting and assassination attempts, on this supposed Revered Figure? Do you really think that the writings, of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Hemingway, Dickens, London, or Eliot, are a true reflection of their character and integrity? I think you should follow your own advice, regarding knowing people, "However, one should not state one’s opinions about others as if they were facts, because nobody can know a person better than they know themselves. Moreover, we might have an opinion about someone that is later proven completely wrong. I expect more layers of denials of your own words, which only makes the rabbit hole deeper.

I have facts and I have rational arguments that support my beliefs. I would not believe in any religion based upon emotion. My beliefs are self-evident and intuitive to me, not questionable or dubious. Obviously you view them differently. It will always be that way because humans are all different.

I think that you should look again at the definitions of "intuitive", and "self-evident". Unless you believe that it is instinctive and obvious, that Gods and Messenger exists? The evidence that is convincing to you is irrelevant, if it can't convince those who are not convinced. You are no different than those that believe in miracles, extra-terrestrials, unicorns, Thor, or that the paranormal has been demonstrated. If your facts and data are only subjective, then so is your belief. As I've stated before, you should lead with the fact that all your evidence is subjective, to avoid anyone thinking that you indeed have any objective evidence. Also without evidence, there is no rational argument(regarding extraordinary claims).

I do not worship any human being. I worship only God.

Are you now saying that you don't worship the Baha'u'llah, or his writings? I'm confused.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

That is not even logical. I can know it and choose not to show it. I am not trying to prove anything, I have said that many times. So there is nothing to use.

I am not obligated to present facts and data to anyone because people can find those themselves. But that does not mean that facts and data do not exist. The predictions Baha’u’llah made were never wrong. Prophecies do not require any level of specificity to be accurate; you are the one who requires that. Prophets do not reveal who, what, where, when, why, and how. Some prophecies are specific, some are not, but they all came to pass.

I disagree with that. If someone is really lacking in self-awareness somebody might be able to see things in them they cannot see, but they do not know them better than they know themselves.

It is true that others might see things in us that we cannot see in ourselves, but that does not mean they know us better than we know ourselves, especially if they do not even know us very well. I think I see things in my coworker she probably does not see, but that is because I do not think she is very aware that certain things are even problematic. From my perspective they are but from her perspective they are not. We are very different in our beliefs and values. She could never understand why I live as I do, but I understand some reasons why she lives as she does; maybe she does too, I don’t really know. I see certain things in her but overall she knows herself better than I do since there is so much I do not know.

That might be true for a lot of people but that is too bad because we should not care what others think of us as long as we know that we are living according to what we believe is moral and good. If our self image is determined by what other people think is us that shows we do not have very good boundaries between ourselves and others, that we are not our own person. People with low self-esteem typically think that it matters what others think about their physical appearance. That is very sad that their whole self image is wrapped up in how they look physically. I need no social cues to validate my self-image because it comes from within. I know who I am, the good and the bad. Nobody needs to tell me what my character defects are. I am very aware of them and because I am aware I work on them constantly. I am my worst critic but I do not see that as necessarily bad unless I am too hard on myself.

I do not encourage anyone to believe in anything. I do not try to indoctrinate anyone. I speak when spoken to and answer posts. I sometimes respond to post if I have something to contribute. I have no interest in convincing anyone of anything I believe. I have probably said that to you at least a dozen times. I do not need any validation for my beliefs from other people. I know what I believe and why. I do not care what other people believe or disbelieve.

I disagree with that. If someone is really lacking in self-awareness somebody might be able to see things in them they cannot see, but they do not know them better than they know themselves.

I'm afraid that you just put all parents and "shrinks" out of business. So, if people want to know why they are experiencing depression, delusions, cognitive dissonance, stress, emotional distress, or other personality discomforts, they should access their self-awareness for true enlightenment? Do you think that patients in mental hospitals are just lacking in self-awareness? Again, I most certainly disagree.

I'm not going to keep pointing out the criticisms I have with your faith, people can find them out for themselves. Criticism of the Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia . Let me summarize. You believe in a faith, that was created by an imprisoned human who proclaimed himself as the prophet foretold by another human. You believe that this prophet is a Messenger of a God. You believe that the prophets' will is the same as the Will of God. You believe that there will be other prophets in the future to keep man's belief current, through God's Messengers. You believe that in the future, all religions will become a single world-wide religion, because it was written by a man.

You deposit no objective, verifiable, non-fallacious, falsifiable evidence, facts or data to support any of these claims. You claim that you are not defending your claims, but simply answering posts. You litter your posts with scriptures, sites, cites, and passages from books, that have no objective material relevance to the issue in question. You claim that you are under no obligation to provide evidence to anyone, yet you keep claiming that you have facts, data, and evidence.

There is a paradox here. It is clear that you are unable, or unwilling to provide evidence to people that trying to understand how you justify or validate your belief. So, why are you responding at all? Are you just obsessed with going the distance? Or, do you think that if you just keep throwing enough mud at the wall, maybe some of it will stick? These tactics do not work with rational thinkers. We can't even get past an acknowledgement that your claims are extraordinary. What exactly are you trying to convey to others in your posts? Does the Baha'i use the "fear of God" as a part of its indoctrination practices, especially on children? The Fear of God. What Does It Mean? - Baha'i Blog .

Anything that man creates, will eventually fails. And, as our population expands, the last thing on anyone's mind will be a universal religion. Maybe your future descendants will also be able to see just how relative morality can be.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm afraid that you just put all parents and "shrinks" out of business. So, if people want to know why they are experiencing depression, delusions, cognitive dissonance, stress, emotional distress, or other personality discomforts, they should access their self-awareness for true enlightenment? Do you think that patients in mental hospitals are just lacking in self-awareness? Again, I most certainly disagree.

No, that was not my point. I was not referring to self-awareness as the cure for all psychological disorders, but if a person is self aware they normally do not have these disorders. The whole point of counseling is to increase self-awareness so people can manage their own problems. Patients in mental hospitals are in another category. Emotional problems like anxiety and depression are not the same as psychotic disorders like schizophrenia that require hospitalization.

I'm not going to keep pointing out the criticisms I have with your faith, people can find them out for themselves. Criticism of the Bahá'í Faith - Wikipedia .

Of course people criticize it. Why would it matter? The only thing that matters is true/false. Everyone has to decide that for themselves. I do not even read on religious threads anymore where they are attacking Baha’i. There is no point. If people are fishing for something they will always find something. It is like water of a duck’s back. I know what I believe and why I believe it. I do not need any validation.

Let me summarize. You believe in a faith, that was created by an imprisoned human who proclaimed himself as the prophet foretold by another human. You believe that this prophet is a Messenger of a God. You believe that the prophets' will is the same as the Will of God. You believe that there will be other prophets in the future to keep man's belief current, through God's Messengers. You believe that in the future, all religions will become a single world-wide religion, because it was written by a man.

Yes, I believe all of that, except that I do not believe that Baha’u’llah was just a human but rather He was a Manifestation of God, which *I believe* is another order of creation.

I thought you did not want to talk about my religion anymore. I know I do not want to, not because I could not explain it or defend it, but because there is no point covering the same territory over and over only to wind up back at the same location.

You deposit no objective, verifiable, non-fallacious, falsifiable evidence, facts or data to support any of these claims. You claim that you are not defending your claims, but simply answering posts. You litter your posts with scriptures, sites, cites, and passages from books, that have no objective material relevance to the issue in question. You claim that you are under no obligation to provide evidence to anyone, yet you keep claiming that you have facts, data, and evidence.

You have said this already, over and over and I explained my position on evidence over and over again. Are you aware of that? I will not explain it again. Why beat a dead horse? I have facts, data and evidence about the Baha’i Faith; otherwise I would not believe it. Why am I obligated to provide it on a forum? People can read it themselves if they are interested.

There is a paradox here. It is clear that you are unable, or unwilling to provide evidence to people that trying to understand how you justify or validate your belief. So, why are you responding at all?

The question is not why I keep responding, the question is why you keep asking after I have already told you what I have and don’t have?

I also told you that I do not have to justify or validate my beliefs to you or to anyone else. I am trying to promote it. You are the one who keeps asking about it.

Are you just obsessed with going the distance? Or, do you think that if you just keep throwing enough mud at the wall, maybe some of it will stick?

In case you have not noticed, I am not throwing anything at anyone. I just answer posts posted to me. If someone asks a specific question I answer. If they make a comment I respond. I do not want to talk about my religion. If I did I would be on the other threads where the Baha’is talk about religion.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

No, that was not my point. I was not referring to self-awareness as the cure for all psychological disorders, but if a person is self aware they normally do not have these disorders. The whole point of counseling is to increase self-awareness so people can manage their own problems. Patients in mental hospitals are in another category. Emotional problems like anxiety and depression are not the same as psychotic disorders like schizophrenia that require hospitalization.

Of course people criticize it. Why would it matter? The only thing that matters is true/false. Everyone has to decide that for themselves. I do not even read on religious threads anymore where they are attacking Baha’i. There is no point. If people are fishing for something they will always find something. It is like water of a duck’s back. I know what I believe and why I believe it. I do not need any validation.

Yes, I believe all of that, except that I do not believe that Baha’u’llah was just a human but rather He was a Manifestation of God, which *I believe* is another order of creation.

I thought you did not want to talk about my religion anymore. I know I do not want to, not because I could not explain it or defend it, but because there is no point covering the same territory over and over only to wind up back at the same location.

You have said this already, over and over and I explained my position on evidence over and over again. Are you aware of that? I will not explain it again. Why beat a dead horse? I have facts, data and evidence about the Baha’i Faith; otherwise I would not believe it. Why am I obligated to provide it on a forum? People can read it themselves if they are interested.

The question is not why I keep responding, the question is why you keep asking after I have already told you what I have and don’t have?

I also told you that I do not have to justify or validate my beliefs to you or to anyone else. I am trying to promote it. You are the one who keeps asking about it.

In case you have not noticed, I am not throwing anything at anyone. I just answer posts posted to me. If someone asks a specific question I answer. If they make a comment I respond. I do not want to talk about my religion. If I did I would be on the other threads where the Baha’is talk about religion.

Deny and contrive, and state and revise. I'm not going to waste my time focussing on your meaning of the word "self-aware", and the context you used it in. People can make up their own minds. Personally, I think you meant "self-judgemental" and "heightened self-awareness", since everyone with working senses are self-aware. But we were talking about people who may know more about you than you know yourself(parents, siblings, spouse, children, psychologists, etc.). Since many people tend to mentally suppress inappropriate and anti-social emotions and behaviors, others can see through them. Do you think that others might know Donald Trump better than he knows himself? I am not saying that others know everything about you(false conclusion), more than you know about yourself. That is your spin. It is a "figure of speech" not to be taken literally. In either case, I totally disagree with the all-inclusive nature of your comments.

Of course people criticize it. Why would it matter? The only thing that matters is true/false. Everyone has to decide that for themselves. I do not even read on religious threads anymore where they are attacking Baha’i. There is no point. If people are fishing for something they will always find something. It is like water of a duck’s back. I know what I believe and why I believe it. I do not need any validation.

Why would it matter? Because you are searching for the truth. A rule of thumb, when the criticism stops, you have found truth. The minute you stop questioning your belief, is when you open the door to religious fanaticisms. Do you think that Einstein's Relativity was not criticized? Do you think that Alan Guth's Inflation Theory was not criticized? It is through these criticisms that new lines of inquiry and discoveries are created. It is through criticisms that current Theories are redefined, refined, or dismissed. It is through criticisms that the truth will eventually emerge. You like most fundamentalist avoid the truth, in favor of your own closed-minded subjective truth. You simply close your eyes, and cover your ears, to avoid and dismiss any facts, data, and evidence, that challenges your religious mindset. Without validation, a delusion is just a delusion. With validation, a delusion becomes science. This is an idea that you will never understand, because you are so deeply immersed in the muck and mire, of the nuance novelty rhetoric of Baha'i dogma.

I also told you that I do not have to justify or validate my beliefs to you or to anyone else. I am trying to promote it. You are the one who keeps asking about it.

If you are trying to promote your religion, then I have every reason to question it. Since you admit that you don't have evidence to support any of your claims, then there is nothing to promote, but opinions from the choir. Also, this forum is not for the platform for promoting anyone's religion, or proselytizing one's beliefs. You might try sticking to the topic, asking for proof of a God(s). You might also try to validate the product first, before you try to promote it. That is just common sense.

The throwing enough mud..., is also a figure of speech. It was not meant to be taken literally. I meant that you keep infusing in most of your post pasted cites and quotes from a non- scientific material sources. So, if you keep hiding behind(figure of speech) these scriptural references, maybe you are hoping that one might provide an answer to a question. If you don't want to talk about your religion, then don't. It would certainly be a first.

 

[BilliardsBall]

English please? I re-read your sentence multiple times, and cannot parse your message. Sorry about that, Chief.

Note: You misspelled "automagically" --- because for your system to work? You must believe in Magic.

I once asked a Theist if he believed in Magic. His emphatic reply: "absolutely not!"

But you do believe in god, right? "Absolutely!"

So it seems he lied to my first question about magic...



Nothing.

You, like so many theists I have met, failed the Essential Test: you ignore the part between "born" and "die". To nearly 100%.

So many theists forget to actually Live. They are so concerned with dying and being dead, that they totally forgot to Live their Life.

Sad, really-- wasting one's life, waiting for Death-- wherein you presume some sort of Magic Reward, and delight in watching everyone you despise, being tortured forever.

How sad is that?

I have the abundant life Jesus promised. Most skeptics, however, are tombstones with a name, date of birth, a dash, and date of death. Be more than dashing...

 

[BilliardsBall]

I'm not hostile. I object to be lied to, however. If you were honest, you'd recognize this.

But I'll ask again: Show me a Prophecy that is actually fulfilled. So far, you have nothing.


Your extreme use of Irony is duly noted and is most amusing.

I strongly suggest you have a look at the meaning of the word "respect". Oh, and have a look at "hostility" too.

And while you are in that dictionary? Look up "preternatural".

What do you mean, "actually" fulfilled? What are your standards? Israel was prophesied circa 2500 BCE to rebirth as a Jewish nation in 1948 CE. Not enough?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Mine is not philosophical blustering, and meaningless personal rants about one's magical beliefs. Mine is a life's journey of discovery and object learning. Not a life of denials, ignorance, and voluntary servitude. Regarding your facts;

Fact: No one knows if Christ is real or a created character in a book of stories, myths and legends. A book created, written, edited, compiled, contracted, and collated by man. A book written thousands of years ago, in a different language, for a different people, to excite the imagination of children, and control the hearts and minds of adults.

Fact: Controlled studies and experiments have consistently revealed that prayer does not work, any better than chance itself. If prayer did work, we would all be immortal, rich, and immune to suffering and diseases. Science cannot study the efficacy of prayer in healing, there are far too many variables. How do you study Divine Intervention( Prayer and healing: A medical and scientific perspective on randomized controlled trials ). I take people at their word, when people make ordinary claims, not extraordinary claims. For those claims, I need evidence.

Fact: Love is a man-made term, used to represent a feeling of intense need, affection, or interest in something or someone. It is also how we conceptualize our biological/hormonal desires to mate. It doesn't matter what you want to call it. In my reality, things are either perceptual or conceptual. Love is a concept that exists in the mind, therefore it is as abstract as logic.

Fact: Everything that I experience through my senses is valid to me. Things that I create in my mind might be necessary for my cognitive functions, but are not valid physically. I seriously doubt that you talk to an Omniscient Being about your tax returns, or the price of eggs. Is it possible that the answers you received, are really your own? Why this psychological need to credit an imaginary construct for your own thoughts, ideas, and decisions? In a sense you are thinking for yourself. Unfortunately, you believe that it is someone else that is providing your thoughts.

Beliefs are like principles. They are meant to act as a guide to modify behavior and thoughts. They are not real guides, or real things.

How do you verify that your beliefs or principles are accurate, e.g.:

1) You believe incorrectly regarding your senses, love, prayer and Jesus Christ.

2) So you must be doing something wrong.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

How do you verify that your beliefs or principles are accurate, e.g.:

1) You believe incorrectly regarding your senses, love, prayer and Jesus Christ.

2) So you must be doing something wrong.

How do I verify or justify my beliefs and principles? I criticize and test them for consistency, accuracy, relevance, validity, dependability, and how rational they are. What am I incorrect about regarding my own senses, and the emotion love? If I am incorrect about prayer or Jesus Christ, then correct me with evidence, not rhetoric about your own personal belief.

 

[BilliardsBall]

How do I verify or justify my beliefs and principles? I criticize and test them for consistency, accuracy, relevance, validity, dependability, and how rational they are. What am I incorrect about regarding my own senses, and the emotion love? If I am incorrect about prayer or Jesus Christ, then correct me with evidence, not rhetoric about your own personal belief.

I used the same standard to trust Jesus and continue to do so.

There are vast reams of evidence available to you. You can start with this:

1) The Bible is 99% non-supernatural in details. Read it.

2) Consider the honesty of the presenters--for example, just today I read how God would judge Israel, harshly. Is there another religion where a local God is against His followers? Is there another book where every person within is shown as a sinner (except the perfect Christ)?

3) Go from there.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I used the same standard to trust Jesus and continue to do so.

There are vast reams of evidence available to you. You can start with this:

1) The Bible is 99% non-supernatural in details. Read it.

2) Consider the honesty of the presenters--for example, just today I read how God would judge Israel, harshly. Is there another religion where a local God is against His followers? Is there another book where every person within is shown as a sinner (except the perfect Christ)?

3) Go from there.

You lose with your first claim. Assuming that God has can't lie your first claim fails because Genesis is clearly mythical if God needs to be honest.

Can God lie? Or will be lie? If he won't or can't lie Genesis is a myth because the evidence clearly goes against a literal Genesis.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

I used the same standard to trust Jesus and continue to do so.

There are vast reams of evidence available to you. You can start with this:

1) The Bible is 99% non-supernatural in details. Read it.

2) Consider the honesty of the presenters--for example, just today I read how God would judge Israel, harshly. Is there another religion where a local God is against His followers? Is there another book where every person within is shown as a sinner (except the perfect Christ)?

3) Go from there.

The only real person that you are trusting is yourself. The thing about having imaginary heroes, is that they can become anything that you want them to be. They can be all-powerful, all-knowing, all-benevolent, all-gender, and all-present. Whatever you can imagine can become your subjective truth. As long as no one questions or challenges your beliefs, they will always be valid to you. However, once your beliefs are challenged, cognitive dissonance takes over. And, without any objective evidence to justify your reality, you must gaslight others to doubt their own reality. For most rational and critical thinkers, you are at best an innocent curiosity, and pose no intellectual threat. But the problem occurs when you impose your beliefs onto children, or onto the most vulnerable people within society. Or, when you try to influence leaders to impose your beliefs, customs, and behavior, onto our schools and other institutes for higher and independent learning.

99% non-supernatural? Really? If it were not for the promise of eternal life for good behavior and obedience, Christianity would end. The Bible is full of prophecies, miracles, resurrections, ghosts, talking animals, supernatural and paranormal events, including events that defy the laws of physics. The rest of it is devoted to homicide, genocide, slavery, masochism, genital mutilations, war, and the testing of unquestioned obedience. Maybe it is you that should read the Bible?

Consider the honesty of the presenters--for example, just today I read how God would judge Israel, harshly. Is there another religion where a local God is against His followers? Is there another book where every person within is shown as a sinner (except the perfect Christ)?

I think that these statement do not require a response. I suggest that you re-read them again. There are at least 4 fallacies that you have committed. In either case, I think without any evidence, we have no place to go from here.

 

[Trailblazer]

Personally, I think you meant "self-judgemental" and "heightened self-awareness", since everyone with working senses are self-aware

No, everyone with working senses is not psychologically self-aware. They might be aware of their physical self but not their thoughts and feelings.

What I meant has absolutely nothing to do with anything physical, it is related to psychology. A self-aware person is aware of who they are and what their thoughts and feelings are and what their goals and motives are. They live consciously rather than unconsciously. They do not suppress their thoughts and feelings. People who suppress their thoughts and feelings keep them in the subconscious mind so they are not aware of their own thoughts and feelings. These people tend to project their thoughts and feelings onto other people because they are not aware of them. Since they live unconsciously, they do not even realize they are doing this.

However, self-aware people can easily recognize this kind of behavior in others because these people who lack self-awareness project their thoughts and feelings onto other people who are aware that these are not their thoughts and feelings. They tend to judge others and think they know everything about others but they do not even know themselves. By contrast, self-aware people do not judge others because they are too busy tending to their own issues and they know others should be doing the same.Self-aware people do not have problems in relationships because they know their own strengths and weaknesses so they do not project them onto others or blame others for what they are doing in order not to have to look at themselves.

A person who is self-aware also knows the boundary between themselves and others and respects that boundary. As such, they do not insult other people, thinking it is acceptable because the other person deserves it, for example. Nobody deserves to be insulted. There is always a better way one can communicate. People who insult others are generally very insecure about themselves and have a poor sense of self so they have to knock others down in order to raise themselves up. We can all see that in Trump. He cannot see it because he is not self-aware. He lives unconsciously.

But we were talking about people who may know more about you than you know yourself(parents, siblings, spouse, children, psychologists, etc.). Since many people tend to mentally suppress inappropriate and anti-social emotions and behaviors, others can see through them.

It is very arrogant for people to think they can see through other people, like they have some kind of special powers or perception. No good psychologist would ever claim to know a client better than they know themselves. A primary goal of psychologists is to help a client become more self-aware. That is an inner process, not something someone can do for you. A psychologist can point out things they think the client does not see in themselves, observations they have, but they should never insist they know more about a client than a client knows. That is unethical because it is a boundary violation.

Family members might also see things in a person that person does not see in themselves, but again, they should not insist that they know what that person is thinking or feeling. The most they should do is point something out, and then let that person try to figure it out for themselves.

People who disagree with everything other people (who believe differently than they do)say and can never meet other people halfway on anything have a definite problem with themselves. I can agree with many things atheists believe, but that does not mean I am going to become an atheist. I just try to understand their perspective. I do not feel at all threatened by their lack of beliefs because I am firm in my beliefs.Because I have a good boundary between myself and others I can have my beliefs and still converse with people who believe or disbelieve very differently than I do and not feel at all threatened. Everyone has just as much of a right to what they believe or disbelieve as I do, as long as we are not hurting anyone.

Why would it matter? Because you are searching for the truth. A rule of thumb, when the criticism stops, you have found truth. The minute you stop questioning your belief, is when you open the door to religious fanaticisms. Do you think that Einstein's Relativity was not criticized? Do you think that Alan Guth's Inflation Theory was not criticized? It is through these criticisms that new lines of inquiry and discoveries are created. It is through criticisms that current Theories are redefined, refined, or dismissed. It is through criticisms that the truth will eventually emerge.

I am sorry but you cannot compare religion with science and expect them to have the same methods of inquiry or critique. Science is constantly changing so new theories evolve from older one ones. The same is not true for religion because it is revealed by God. Humans cannot make changes to scriptures once recorded.Whatever is revealed by God is not subject to updating by infallible humans since God is infallible. However, religious truth is similar to scientific truth in that it is not static, since it is updated in every new age. Just as science evolves over time, religion evolves over time. There will always be more scientific truth and there will always be more religious truth.

Logically speaking, if a religion is the truth from God, nobody has the right to criticize it because nobody can know more than an Omniscient God. People can disagree that a certain religion is the truth from God, and criticize it, but their criticisms will not change the fact that it is the truth from God, if it is. What people believe does not alter reality.

You like most fundamentalist avoid the truth, in favor of your own closed-minded subjective truth. You simply close your eyes, and cover your ears, to avoid and dismiss any facts, data, and evidence, that challenges your religious mindset. Without validation, a delusion is just a delusion. With validation, a delusion becomes science. This is an idea that you will never understand, because you are so deeply immersed in the muck and mire, of the nuance novelty rhetoric of Baha'i dogma.

All that is just hollow anti-religion rhetoric unless you can prove you are right. I am willing to look at any facts and data or evidence that challenges my religious mindset. Are you willing to look at what challenges your atheist mindset? You brush it off whenever you think it is not worthy of looking at just as I brush off calumnies used against The Baha’i Faith I do not consider worth the bother. So you are projecting onto me what you do. I know they are calumnies because I have already done my due diligence. To say that Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha did not have an authentic will and testament is just a way to try to trash the Faith. The detractors strike from all angles. The original wills reside with the UHJ and they are not obligated to show them to every one of the seven million Baha’is in the world. The UHJ is not hiding anything as they have no reason to hide anything. This UHJ conspiracy theory is laughable.

If you are trying to promote your religion, then I have every reason to question it. Since you admit that you don't have evidence to support any of your claims, then there is nothing to promote, but opinions from the choir. Also, this forum is not for the platform for promoting anyone's religion, or proselytizing one's beliefs. You might try sticking to the topic, asking for proof of a God(s). You might also try to validate the product first, before you try to promote it. That is just common sense.

I am not trying to promote my religion. I just respond to posts. I have said that many times. I have what I consider evidence but you do not consider it evidence so there is nothing more to discuss. Arguing about what constitutes evidence and what does not is an exercise in futility because we will never agree.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

No, everyone with working senses is not psychologically self-aware. They might be aware of their physical self but not their thoughts and feelings.

What I meant has absolutely nothing to do with anything physical, it is related to psychology. A self-aware person is aware of who they are and what their thoughts and feelings are and what their goals and motives are. They live consciously rather than unconsciously. They do not suppress their thoughts and feelings. People who suppress their thoughts and feelings keep them in the subconscious mind so they are not aware of their own thoughts and feelings. These people tend to project their thoughts and feelings onto other people because they are not aware of them. Since they live unconsciously, they do not even realize they are doing this.

However, self-aware people can easily recognize this kind of behavior in others because these people who lack self-awareness project their thoughts and feelings onto other people who are aware that these are not their thoughts and feelings. They tend to judge others and think they know everything about others but they do not even know themselves. By contrast, self-aware people do not judge others because they are too busy tending to their own issues and they know others should be doing the same.Self-aware people do not have problems in relationships because they know their own strengths and weaknesses so they do not project them onto others or blame others for what they are doing in order not to have to look at themselves.

A person who is self-aware also knows the boundary between themselves and others and respects that boundary. As such, they do not insult other people, thinking it is acceptable because the other person deserves it, for example. Nobody deserves to be insulted. There is always a better way one can communicate. People who insult others are generally very insecure about themselves and have a poor sense of self so they have to knock others down in order to raise themselves up. We can all see that in Trump. He cannot see it because he is not self-aware. He lives unconsciously.

It is very arrogant for people to think they can see through other people, like they have some kind of special powers or perception. No good psychologist would ever claim to know a client better than they know themselves. A primary goal of psychologists is to help a client become more self-aware. That is an inner process, not something someone can do for you. A psychologist can point out things they think the client does not see in themselves, observations they have, but they should never insist they know more about a client than a client knows. That is unethical because it is a boundary violation.

Family members might also see things in a person that person does not see in themselves, but again, they should not insist that they know what that person is thinking or feeling. The most they should do is point something out, and then let that person try to figure it out for themselves.

People who disagree with everything other people (who believe differently than they do)say and can never meet other people halfway on anything have a definite problem with themselves. I can agree with many things atheists believe, but that does not mean I am going to become an atheist. I just try to understand their perspective. I do not feel at all threatened by their lack of beliefs because I am firm in my beliefs.Because I have a good boundary between myself and others I can have my beliefs and still converse with people who believe or disbelieve very differently than I do and not feel at all threatened. Everyone has just as much of a right to what they believe or disbelieve as I do, as long as we are not hurting anyone.

I am sorry but you cannot compare religion with science and expect them to have the same methods of inquiry or critique. Science is constantly changing so new theories evolve from older one ones. The same is not true for religion because it is revealed by God. Humans cannot make changes to scriptures once recorded.Whatever is revealed by God is not subject to updating by infallible humans since God is infallible. However, religious truth is similar to scientific truth in that it is not static, since it is updated in every new age. Just as science evolves over time, religion evolves over time. There will always be more scientific truth and there will always be more religious truth.

Logically speaking, if a religion is the truth from God, nobody has the right to criticize it because nobody can know more than an Omniscient God. People can disagree that a certain religion is the truth from God, and criticize it, but their criticisms will not change the fact that it is the truth from God, if it is. What people believe does not alter reality.

All that is just hollow anti-religion rhetoric unless you can prove you are right. I am willing to look at any facts and data or evidence that challenges my religious mindset. Are you willing to look at what challenges your atheist mindset? You brush it off whenever you think it is not worthy of looking at just as I brush off calumnies used against The Baha’i Faith I do not consider worth the bother. So you are projecting onto me what you do. I know they are calumnies because I have already done my due diligence. To say that Baha’u’llah and Abdu’l-Baha did not have an authentic will and testament is just a way to try to trash the Faith. The detractors strike from all angles. The original wills reside with the UHJ and they are not obligated to show them to every one of the seven million Baha’is in the world. The UHJ is not hiding anything as they have no reason to hide anything. This UHJ conspiracy theory is laughable.

I am not trying to promote my religion. I just respond to posts. I have said that many times. I have what I consider evidence but you do not consider it evidence so there is nothing more to discuss. Arguing about what constitutes evidence and what does not is an exercise in futility because we will never agree.

Tell me, why do you always need to over-generalize a premise to justify a specific conclusion? Why do you need to insult my intelligence by claiming that you didn't say something, or meant something else, whenever your statements are quoted back to you? Why do you muddy the waters of specificity, to insert a general conclusion? Why do you avoid, dismiss, or deflect specific questions asked of you? Why do you keep emphasizing that you are only answering the posters, when you know full well that it is HOW you answer the posts that is what's relevant? Why do you seem to play the victim when it is clearly you that is stirring the pot, by providing nonsense answers, and implying that it is others fault for not accepting your answers as evidence? Why can't you understand the true nature of your positions, and its supernatural/paranormal ramifications? If you claimed that you were the Queen of Egypt, would I be arrogant, or need some special power of perception to tell you that you are wrong? Do you think that someone claiming that there is no evidence to suggest that a God exists, is more honest, than someone claiming that God exists because you can't prove that he doesn't? Do you believe that homosexuality is a sin against God? Do you think that the Nation of Israel is God's chosen nation? Do you believe in the afterlife, or some form of Heaven and Hell?

Do you seriously think that you would be self-aware if all your sense organs were missing? Of course not. What biological mechanism would you use to determine your position in space and time, or that you were separate from your environment? Or, that you have the ability of introspection? So yes, without sensory perception there is no self-awareness. Or do you think that a functioning brain is irrelevant to self-awareness? Mental patients, psychotics, sociopaths, and even Donald Trump, have the capacity for self-awareness. Being a pathological liar, does not mean that you are unaware that you are lying. If you want to attribute all cognitive mental functions to self-awareness, then be my guest. You are totally wrong, but it would be just another slippery slope, and a waste of time to play your terminology games. Maybe it is empathy that you really mean, and not self-awareness?

You also seem to be trying to make this personal. It isn't. I'm only interested in the comments you make. They are frustrating and inconsistent. It is like arguing with myself. Everything that I say is returned back to me, as either a denial, or has inherited a new spin. If I ask you for the evidence you claim, you say that there is no objective evidence. And, why would I expect any? When I ask about the belief you deposit, you become defensive, and ask me to disprove God or the Messenger of God. I'm under no illusion that anything I say would have any effect on your cognitive processes at all. I'm under no illusion that you will ever put into practice your own examples of self-awareness, and introspection. Also no one is suggesting that people become mind-readers or empaths, so spare me the straw man. I don't expect your parents and friends to know what you are thinking or feeling. Keep my statements in their proper context.

Logically speaking, if a religion is the truth from God, nobody has the right to criticize it because nobody can know more than an Omniscient God. People can disagree that a certain religion is the truth from God, and criticize it, but their criticisms will not change the fact that it is the truth from God, if it is. What people believe does not alter reality.

Where did this come from? There is absolutely nothing logically consistent about these sentences at all. It is the "IF" that must be established first. The rest is just unsupported gibberish.

Although this is just an attempt to avoid your burden of proof, I am more than willing to look at anything that would challenges my mindset. You have clearly failed to respond to any of the evidence(or lack of) that would challenge your religious mindset(evidence of the power of prayer, miracles, supernatural or paranormal events, resurrections, or any event that defy the laws of physics). So what is it that you want to challenge, about my reality?

 

[BilliardsBall]

You lose with your first claim. Assuming that God has can't lie your first claim fails because Genesis is clearly mythical if God needs to be honest.

Can God lie? Or will be lie? If he won't or can't lie Genesis is a myth because the evidence clearly goes against a literal Genesis.

Let's cut to the chase! Provide evidence against the resurrection, other than "I don't believe supernatural things ever happen." I have 12 documents written by careful writers in lovely Greek. They were contemporary to the events, wrote in the face of persecution, are more honest than you, less angry than you, etc.

 

[BilliardsBall]

The only real person that you are trusting is yourself. The thing about having imaginary heroes, is that they can become anything that you want them to be. They can be all-powerful, all-knowing, all-benevolent, all-gender, and all-present. Whatever you can imagine can become your subjective truth. As long as no one questions or challenges your beliefs, they will always be valid to you. However, once your beliefs are challenged, cognitive dissonance takes over. And, without any objective evidence to justify your reality, you must gaslight others to doubt their own reality. For most rational and critical thinkers, you are at best an innocent curiosity, and pose no intellectual threat. But the problem occurs when you impose your beliefs onto children, or onto the most vulnerable people within society. Or, when you try to influence leaders to impose your beliefs, customs, and behavior, onto our schools and other institutes for higher and independent learning.

99% non-supernatural? Really? If it were not for the promise of eternal life for good behavior and obedience, Christianity would end. The Bible is full of prophecies, miracles, resurrections, ghosts, talking animals, supernatural and paranormal events, including events that defy the laws of physics. The rest of it is devoted to homicide, genocide, slavery, masochism, genital mutilations, war, and the testing of unquestioned obedience. Maybe it is you that should read the Bible?



I think that these statement do not require a response. I suggest that you re-read them again. There are at least 4 fallacies that you have committed. In either case, I think without any evidence, we have no place to go from here.

There are prophecies in the Bible, yes, those do not require supernatural anything to verify. We can verify several thousand prophecies, made by different Bible writers, in history. Over 99% of the text is poetry, history, etc. and non-supernatural.

I know what cognitive dissonance is, and I find that challenging my beliefs does not induce it as you suggest, rather, it encourages me to 1) read both sides of each argument and 2) affirm that God is faithful, true. I know Him.

I do read the Bible. I've studied it daily for decades. Yes, it includes the miraculous. We can all use an occasional miracle here and there. Take it easy!

PS. Genital mutilations? Circumcision seems to lead to winning Nobel Prizes.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let's cut to the chase! Provide evidence against the resurrection, other than "I don't believe supernatural things ever happen." I have 12 documents written by careful writers in lovely Greek. They were contemporary to the events, wrote in the face of persecution, are more honest than you, less angry than you, etc.

Nope, that is not the way that it works. A Muslim could demand that you provide evidence that Mo didn't ride to the Moon on a magical flying horse.

You can't even provide your twelve authors, I would be surprised if more than one was contemporary to the events, and the one that I can think of did not say anything about the resurrection. The burden of proof is upon you for your claims, otherwise according to your standards you should believe the claims of almost every religion.