1. 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!

Featured If God spoke directly to everyone...

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Trailblazer, Jan 11, 2020.

  1. Bob the Unbeliever

    Bob the Unbeliever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    7,139
    Ratings:
    +4,492
    Religion:
    unbeliever
    It's not different: We have proof of how gravity works.

    What do YOU have, that demonstrates god?

    Anything? Anything at all? No?
     
  2. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    We will never have proof that demonstrates God like we can demonstrate gravity..
     
  3. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,400
    Ratings:
    +6,619
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Not exactly. It's rather based upon our understanding of gravitational forces and the squishyness / vulnerability of our human bodies.

    But close enough. The point though, is that you seem to agree that belief is not a choice. You can't just "choose" to believe you'll walk away unharmed.


    Okay, I will buy that when you put it that way.

    More specifically: your personal understanding of this evidence.
    But anyway: so belief is not a choice, but a compulsion based on your understanding of reality (which can be right or wrong).

    And your terminology is confusing and wrong.
    Choosing implies free (trivial) choice. Like choosing steak over chicken at the restaurant.

    But as you noted above: beliefs aren't such free choices. "choosing" simply isn't a valid term to describe this.

    No, they do not.

    No, it's not.
    One deals with your understanding of reality and a conclusion that that understanding inevitably leads to.
    While the other concerns a trivial free choice based on a personal preference.

    Because using language correctly is important in communication.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,400
    Ratings:
    +6,619
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Claims are an inherent part of beliefs.
    Having a belief, literally means "to accept a claim as true".

    It's impossible to express a belief without at least implicitly making a claim.

    The statement "I believe god exists" includes / implies the claim that a god exists.

    You can't express a belief without also expressing a claim.

    On the flip side, making a claim also implies a belief in said claim.

    "a god exists", implies that you believe a god exists.

    Beliefs and claims are tightly linked. You can't have one without the other.

    I wouldn't, because it is circular.
    The scriptures ARE the claims. What you believe religiously, is what is written in the scriptures. Those are the claims. If you invoke those scriptures as evidence of your beliefs, you are saying that the claims are evidence of themselves.

    Evidence for your beliefs must therefor necessarily come from another source.


    Because circularity is a fallacy.
    Fallacies aren't evidence.
     
  5. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,400
    Ratings:
    +6,619
    Religion:
    Atheist
    And the same goes for "proof" concerning Allah, Thor, Zeus, Santa, leprechauns, rainbow farting unicorns,... or any other unfalsifiable thing.
     
  6. Pudding

    Pudding Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2015
    Messages:
    1,420
    Ratings:
    +301
    I cannot communicate with you on this matter anymore if you want to use an unfounded definitions for words.

    I probably will. But there're two different kinds of evidence, one are convincing and the other unconvincing. If your evidence are convincing, i'll believe what you say (regards your God) is fact. If your evidence are unconvincing, then i'll remain unconvinced about what you say.

    Also note that you have to first provide precise evidence that your God exists, because i and other non-believers have not been convince to believe your God exists. If you don't do that, anything you say about your God wil be moot.

    If you change your mind now and want to provide evidence to backup your statements, you're welcome to do so, but please provide precise, unvague evidence, otherwise your op's credibility will remain at 0.

    Anyway, i'm feeling tired and have had enough of conversation with you regards your op. You can feel free to backup your op's statements with evidence and let other people here examine whether it's convincing or not; or simply let your op's credibility remains at 0. I'm done with this thread, goodbye.
     
    #206 Pudding, Jan 16, 2020
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2020
  7. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    2,894
    Ratings:
    +1,897
    Religion:
    None
    Thanks. I did miss our long winded discussions and learning about your faith while I was away. The result of my experience is that I do appreciate the Bahai'i faith more than I did before because of its principles, even though I might not agree with the theology, because it seems to align with what I consider moral as opposed to what some other religions might consider moral. Just to let you know.

    So God favours a persons genuineness in seeking truth rather than the conclusion they come to?

    I think your question reveals that we actually do not know what evidence will convince us of God, which we should sort out. How does God revealing himself to us take away our free will? If you reveal yourself to me in real life, you aren't taking away my free will, so why would it be that way with God?

    How could someone search hard for God out of love, if they don't even know that he exists or who he is? Wouldn't love for God develop after finding him and getting to know him?

    "Also, if it was really easy, everyone could be believers, and within the ‘everyone’ would be people who were unworthy of belief." Regarding this, I do not think that believing in God would really be what really matters because knowing that God exists would just be a fact if he is known. The Bible says in James 2:19 that even the demons believe in shudder. I think that it is a moral imperative for God to make himself objectively known to all in existence. Whether we want to follow his guidance or not, whether we want to do good or evil is what should be the criteria as to whether we are worthy or not.

    Maybe. The question of whether God can allow us to prove him scientifically would be something to think of. It certainly would prevent the current confusion we have from happening.

    I find this fascinating. And I think we have discussed this before. But please refresh my memory. Could you please explain to me how the messengers came to be and where the source of their divine nature comes from?
     
  8. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    That too.
    Yes, I agree.
    Yes, I agree. However, our personal understanding of the evidence is not static, since understandings can change.
    Okay, fair enough. Beliefs are not chosen but some other things that are not trivial are chosen, like whether to gte married or have children, for example.
     
  9. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    The claims originate from the Messengers of God who found religions. If we believe their claims then we accept their claims as true.

    Imo, we should never make a claim that our religion is true. Rather, we should direct anyone who is interested towards the claims of the alleged Messenger of God. If He made claims, He should offer support for His claims, which can be considered evidence.
    No, that is not true. We should not claim things we cannot prove.
    I do not make a claim that my religion is true because I know I cannot prove it (to anyone except myself). I point people towards the claims that Baha’u’llah made and the evidence He offered in support of those claims.
    No, sorry, it does not. I cannot claim that God exists and I never would, because I cannot prove it (to anyone but myself).
    Nope, I can say “I believe” without claiming what I believe is true.
    If I made a claim it would be associated with a belief, but I do not make claims associated with my beliefs.
    I would not say “God exists” because that would be a bold claim I cannot prove. Rather, I would say “I believe” God exists or “I know” God exists. I do not know it as a fact that can be proven; I know it because I have inner certitude, because it has been proven to me, but I cannot prove it to anyone else. If people want to “know” then they have to do their own homework.
    That is not true. A person can have beliefs and not make claims about them.
    Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.[1] The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Circular reasoning - Wikipedia

    No, it is not circular because I did not begin with what I wanted to end with. In other words, I did not say that Baha’u’llah is a Messenger because Baha’u’llah said He was a Messenger in His scriptures.

    The evidence that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger is not that Baha’u’llah said He was a Messenger because that would be circular reasoning.
    I am sorry but you are wrong. IN the scriptures are some claims, but I do not invoke the claims that’s are written in the scriptures as evidence.

    The claims that Baha’u’llah made are only a very small part of the scriptures. Logically speaking, they have to be embedded in the scriptures because otherwise we would not know who Baha’u’llah was claiming to be.

    To use a claim of Jesus as an example:John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”

    If Jesus has not said that we would not know who He was claiming to be. However, that claim is not evidence of anything. The evidence that Jesus was a Messenger of God iswho He was as a Person, what He did on his mission (his works), and his teachings that we find in the NT.

    The scriptures themselves are evidence that a Messenger was from God, but they certainly are not the only evidence, they are just ‘part’ of the evidence.
    My beliefs are predicated on the premise that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. Everything I believe flows from that one premise. He was either a Messenger of God or a false prophet; there are no other logical possibilities. If He was a Messenger of God, then everything He wrote is the truth from God. If he was a false prophet, everything he wrote can be completely disregarded because it has no value; and it would also be lies, because Baha’u’llah claimed to be a Messenger of God.

    If we want to know if someone was a Messenger of God we have to look at Him -- who He was, what He accomplished, and what He wrote; not someone’s opinion about these.I believe that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God because of (1) who He was as a Person, (2) what He did on his mission (his works), and (3) his teachings (which are in His scriptures). I have to refer to outside sources for (1) and (2) but I have to read His scriptures for (3).
    But it is not circular, as I explained above.
     
  10. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Do you have a point? If you are saying that just because we cannot prove ‘God exists’ is false that does not mean ‘God exists’ is true, I agree.

    In reality, God either exists or not and what we can prove has no bearing that. Proof is just what people want in order to believe something is true. If God had provided no proof whatsoever, God would still exist if He exists. However, God has provided proof and atheists just don’t like it.

    Conversely, if we ‘believed’ we had proof that God exists and God did not exist, God would not exist, because beliefs do not create reality.

    I love logic. :D
     
  11. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    That is true, you would have to be convinced by my evidence in order to believe what I say about God.
    According to the following definitions, there is evidence that God exists, but there is no proof, because the existence of God can never be established as a fact.

    Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:https://www.google.com/search

    Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search
    The evidence that what I said in my OP is true is contingent upon whether Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God or not. If He was then everything He said was true. If He was a false prophet, then we cannot trust anything He wrote, since it was just his own ideas.

    In order to fully understand where I am coming from, I refer you to read the long post I just wrote to @TagliatelliMonster #209
     
  12. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Just curious.... What Baha’i principles do you like and what Baha’i theology do you not agree with?
    I cannot say what God prefers, but I think it would be the genuineness in seeking truth, because that indicates sincerity, and sincerity is very important in the Baha’i teachings:
    “The purpose of the one true God in manifesting Himself is to summon all mankind to truthfulness and sincerity, to piety and trustworthiness, to resignation and submissiveness to the Will of God, to forbearance and kindliness, to uprightness and wisdom. His object is to array every man with the mantle of a saintly character, and to adorn him with the ornament of holy and goodly deeds.” Gleanings, p. 299

    If you are sincere seeker of truth, even if you do not come to the right conclusions at least you made an effort and Baha’u’llah wrote that effort is a key to how progress we will make.
    “The incomparable Creator hath created all men from one same substance, and hath exalted their reality above the rest of His creatures. Success or failure, gain or loss, must, therefore, depend upon man’s own exertions. The more he striveth, the greater will be his progress.” Gleanings, pp. 81-82
    Read what I said very carefully. If God revealed Himself to us that would not take away our free will to choose to believe or not, but if God also convinced us it was actually Him speaking, the that would affect your free will choice, because nobody who actually knows God exists is going to reject Him. According to what Baha’u’llah wrote, and that is also in the Bible, God does not want to make it obvious that He exists; he wants us to search and figure it out ourselves.
    Hmmmm.... That is a good question. More accurately stated it would read: Why would someone search hard for God out of love, if they don't even know that he exists or who he is? I probably spoke hastily because they would be seeking out of love for Truth, not love for the god they do not yet know exists.
    Maybe what you are saying is that ‘everyone’ deserves to know that God exists, but it is what they do after they know that will differentiate them and make them worthy?

    You said: “I think that it is a moral imperative for God to make himself objectively known to all in existence.” Whereas I do not think that God is subject to morality, it would be only justice for God to make Himself known, if He is going to hold us accountable for believing in Him. Baha’u’llah wrote that every man is able of himself to appreciate the Beauty of God because if everyone did not have such a capacity he could not be called to account for his failure. To me that seems to mean that we are all accountable for believing.

    What do you mean by God making Himself objectively known? How do you think God could do that given God is Spirit.
    With all due respect, I am quite certain we will never be able to prove God scientifically. Any proof we get will have to come from God. I believe that in the future everyone will believe in God because that is in the Bible and the Writings of the Bab, and I believe that in the future everyone will believe in the Cause of Baha’u’llah because He wrote:“The day is approaching when God will have exalted His Cause and magnified His testimony in the eyes of all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth.” (Gleanings, p. 248) I also believe that in the future there will be one common faith, because that is what God has ordained. What it will be called nobody knows.

    Exactly when and how this will happen only God knows, but certainly will end the current confusion.
    According to Baha’i beliefs, Messengers of God, what Baha’is normally refer to as Manifestations of God, possess two stations: one is the physical station pertaining to the world of matter, and the others is the spiritual station, born of the substance of God. In other words, one station is that of a human being, and one, of the Divine Reality. It is because they possess both a human and a divine station that they can act as *mediators* between God and man.

    Every Manifestation of God is a mirror of God, reflecting His Self, His Beauty, His Might and Glory. All else besides them are to be regarded as mirrors capable of reflecting the glory of these Manifestations Who are themselves the Primary Mirrors of the Divine Being,

    The Manifestations of God are another order of creation above an ordinary man. Their souls had pre-existence in the spiritual world before their bodies were born in this world, whereas the souls of all humans come into being at the moment of conception. The spiritual world is where They get their special powers from God. They possess a universal divine mind that is different than ours and that is why God only speaks to them directly and through Them God communicates to humanity.
     
  13. Left Coast

    Left Coast Happy New Year!
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2019
    Messages:
    5,252
    Ratings:
    +7,428
    Religion:
    Buddhish
    Having cake. Eating it too.

    I never claimed to be able to make god do anything (I don't think he's actually there). And this has nothing to do with "helping me out." It has to do with the absurdities created by alleging the existence of an omnipotent being.

    Ok, he does want us to believe in him? Before you made it sound as though he doesn't.

    And if they don't believe he exists, they'll definitely never get whatever message he has. :shrug:

    That's just might makes right morality on a cosmic scale. Sorry, if god does something that causes harm, it's perfectly justified to say that, in that it's true. You can pretend that god is morally perfect and therefore convince yourself that he's above reproach no matter how awful the things he might do are, but I'm under no such preconceived theological obligation.

    Our desires are not our choice. For the 20th time.

    You literally just admitted God is responsible for everything in the universe.

    So yes. He is responsible.

    Most people believe in some version of God, but are wildly in disagreement about almost every single thing about him/her/it/them.

    I'm only going to say this one more time for you, so try to pay attention. This isn't about what I want. This is about what an actual omnipotent being would plausibly do. The arrangement you're advocating is implausible and silly if an actual omnipotent being exists who wants people to have accurate information about him.

    If I told you I have an invisible dragon in my garage, what would make you believe me? You'd need some kind of solid empirical evidence wouldn't you? You wouldn't just take my word for it, as the "messenger" for the dragon. You would want to actually, empirically verify that the thing is in my garage.

    According to your logic, it's "childish" of you to demand such evidence of me. What am I, a "short order cook" who has to, "present you with good evidence" for you to believe things? Pshh. Childish.

    Demanding good evidence (ie empirical, independently verifiable, etc.) for God in order to believe he exists isn't "childish." It's the basis upon which we should come to all our beliefs.

    I genuinely have no idea. That's why I don't believe in the supernatural. I don't see a way anyone can demonstrate it. How can you?

    No, the crux of the problem is that you believe in something (the supernatural) that you have no way of providing any evidence for (because all your evidence is natural).

    So you want me to answer a question about what an omnipotent being could do, but pretend he's not omnipotent? What sense does that make?

    I agree. Which is another reason why I don't see how "messengers" can demonstrate a God exists.

    But god isn't around to tell us if they got it correct, so that's a meaningless ability.

    If you have any evidence of miracles I'd love to see it. "See into the future" is context dependent: I can see into the future right now and tell you the sun is going to rise tomorrow. That doesn't mean I have god on speed dial.
     
  14. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    I see nothing absurd at all. It is simply a matter of perspective, and of course it helps to actually “know something” about God.
    He does, but for our sakes, not for His sake, because God needs nothing for Himself.
    Good point.
    God is not subject to morality because God is not a human. God does not have “behavior.” God has a will and he wills things.

    Morality: principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

    God sets the standards for human morality.
    Any you know what God does exactly how?
    God is perfect because God is infallible. God is not subject to morality. You are anthropomorphizing God. I think the Bible has gone to your head. Thank God I never had that problem.
    I did not say our desires are our choice. I said “We should only try hard to obtain belief in God if we want to believe in God.” If you do not want to believe in God then you don’t have to do anything.
    God is responsible for creating the universe and maintaining it but God is not responsible for one single thing that goes on down here on earth, because God gave us a brain and free will. Is the builder or the maintenance man responsible for what people do at their workplace?
    Believe whatever you want to believe. God is not responsible for what humans do because we have a brain and free will.
    And so??? If they had recognized the latest Messenger of God they would not be in disagreement anymore, but instead they cling tenaciously to their older religions. God is in no way responsible for that. It is not that they cannot help what they believe, because they already believe God exists and they have no interest in changing their religion. This is a choice they make.
    And you know that how??? No, you do not know anything about God. You cannot know what an omnipotent God would do.
    It works just fine when people recognize God’s Messenger and read what He wrote because that is how they get the accurate information. It certainly is not God’s fault that most people reject His Messengers, at least in the beginning and for a long time after they appear.
    Sorry, but empirical verification is not possible.
    I am not demanding such evidence.
    No, it is insane, because no such evidence has ever existed nor will it ever exist. The childish part is expecting God to deliver it just because you want it.
    No, it cannot be demonstrated the way you want it demonstrated, but it was demonstrated to me because I had an open mind and I had no confirmation bias so I saw the Baha’i Faith for what it was, a religion that makes logical sense and has what individuals and humanity needs in this age. I left God out of it for a long time, because it was not necessary to have a firm belief in God in order to see the beauty of the Baha’i teachings. Along with the practical applications for life on earth, I accepted the supernatural beliefs because it is a package deal. If Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be, I cannot take one part and leave the rest. It is either all true or all false.
    For me, the evidence of the supernatural is what Baha’u’llah wrote. There are also other books written about the supernatural that correlate with what He wrote, and I consider those supporting evidence of the soul and the afterlife.
    I did not say to pretend God is not omnipotent.
    They would be God if they had those unique attributes of God. I do not see what it is necessary for them to be God in order to represent God and reveal God.
    God is not going to tell you anything, except through His Messengers. You either believe their claims to speak for God or not. That is what all this boils down to.
    Miracles are only miracles to those who witnessed them. Others will deny it happened that way. Baha’is believe that what happened during the Execution of the Báb was a miracle. Others have different ideas.

    Not only did Baha’u’llah know things He did not learn in any school, He also predicted many things that later came to pass. In this book there is a list of 30 specific things Baha’u’llah knew and things He predicted that later came to pass: The Challenge of Baha'u'llah
     
  15. Thanda

    Thanda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2010
    Messages:
    2,609
    Ratings:
    +432
    Religion:
    LDS

    I disagree - God does speak to everyone. John 6:45 - "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God...."

    Some call it the Holy Spirit, others the Light of Christ, others call it conscience and others still intuition - but God speaks to us all. But not all who hear listen.

    God is the first and true preacher. And all his children are equal before him. So he speaks to all of them directly and calls on them to follow him. But many reject him choosing rather to follow their own desires or the doctrines of men.

    John 3:19 - "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."
     
  16. Israel Khan

    Israel Khan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2017
    Messages:
    2,894
    Ratings:
    +1,897
    Religion:
    None
    I like the moral message of the Baha'i. I do not agree with the Baha'i interpretation of the Bible. From discussion with you it seems that the Baha'i concept of what God wants from us would make sense if God existed. So for instance he rewards those seeking truth rather than punishing those who don't believe in him even though they honestly didn't believe based on the evidence. Although this is from discussion with you and not seeing other views by other Baha'i's. Your view certainly makes sense to me in this regard.

    I would respect a God with that viewpoint more.

    I would disagree with that though. In the Bible Satan and other angels knew God, but they still rejected him. God forcing us to believe would be the problem.

    If it is love for truth, then I have no problem with that.

    Yes.

    Yes, it would be just for God to make himself known.

    By objectively, I mean that there would be no doubt of God's existence to a rational mind, just like we do not doubt that humans exist. As for how God would do that, I do not know the nature of God or his capabilities or what are the limits of a Spirit being if he is one. Although we do know that air exists and we experience it through certain senses and not others. The Hebrew word for spirit could also be used to mean breath and wind so maybe comparing him to how we know wind might suffice if the Bible's description of God is true.

    Well, yes, that would be the case if your faith is true. But since I don't believe the same I approach the issue from an empirical perspective. We might or might not discover that a God exists and that especially depends on what his nature is. So really I cannot say either way on the matter.


    Ah yes, I remember this now. They are manifestations of God. A fascinating concept. Thanks for jogging my memory.
     
  17. Left Coast

    Left Coast Happy New Year!
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2019
    Messages:
    5,252
    Ratings:
    +7,428
    Religion:
    Buddhish
    You already admitted there was something absurd about it. That's why you have to revise the definition of omnipotent to mean, "having all power...except power to do things which are absurd."

    No, he doesn't. Humans set the standards of human morality, all the evidence indicates this. So if God tortures someone, you find nothing morally problematic about that?

    :facepalm:

    Hypotheticals, Trail. Everything I'm discussing about what God does is hypothetical. I don't think God actually does anything, because I don't think he exists.

    :tearsofjoy:

    That's completely incoherent.

    On theism, if the universe is a house, God is far more than the construction superintendent or maintenance guy. He's something like Dr. Frankenstein on steroids, designing and creating each person who lives in the house down to the subatomic level and having full knowledge of everything they will do and how they will react to all stimuli. If you design and create every detail of a person who you know for a fact will be a psychopath and murder people without remorse, sorry, you are responsible for that.

    And so, God's alleged method for disseminating accurate information about himself is painfully flawed. Again, it's no better than the method used by any charlatan.

    And if junk food were healthy, everyone would have a six pack. :shrug: But it isn't, and they don't.

    You're contradicting yourself. When asked directly, you'll admit belief is not a choice, but everything else you say about beliefs presuppose that people choose their beliefs. Pick a lane.

    I know the definition of omnipotence and omniscience. If I can imagine an arrangement in which God accurately disseminates information about himself to everyone, so can God if he exists.

    But they don't, so it doesn't work just fine. It works terribly. :shrug:

    Sorry, it is. God knows exactly what would convince non-believers to believe, and he doesn't provide that. 100% his choice.

    If empirical verification that I have an invisible dragon in my garage is not possible, would you ever believe me?

    So you believe me that I have an invisible dragon in my garage? If not, why not?

    Then once again, you think it's "childish" to expect the same kind of evidence we expect for anything else we're asked to believe. That's not childish. It's critical thinking 101.

    That black and white thinking doesn't make sense. It's possible for a religion to have some perfectly nice or true teachings without being entirely true. You actually believe exactly that about every other major religion.

    Great thread content.

    You said:

    So yes, you are asking me to conjecture about what God could do, but not employ his omnipotent powers. That is ludicrous.

    How can something natural "represent and reveal" something supernatural? How can I ever demonstrate something supernatural exists using only natural things?

    And without god around to confirm whether the messengers got the message right, there's no rational reason to believe them. That is what this all boils down to, you're right.

    Great thread content.

    Not sure I'm ready to read a 250+ page book on the subject (I've read a lot of apologetics in my life), but sounds fascinating.
     
  18. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    John 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

    Everyone was taught of God through the Bible, but God never spoke directly to everyone. Imo, God only speaks directly to Prophets or what I refer to as Messengers of God, and then they speak to the rest of us through the scriptures.
     
  19. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    The Baha’i interpretation of the Bible is a big subject. What about the Baha’i interpretation do you disagree with?
    You raise a good point. I am not sure what other Baha’is would say. These are my own ideas based upon how I interpret the Baha’i Writings and the Bible.
    Then, Imo, you would be respecting the real God, if you believed in God.
    I do not believe in a being called Satan. I believe Satan is symbolic for our lower material nature, what Baha’is call the Satanic self.

    But you are right, as hypothetically speaking one could know God and still reject God, if they were evil.

    Yes, I think the main problem with God convincing us is that is taking away our free will to choose. The reason that is problematic seems blatantly obvious to me yet it flies over the heads of many atheists. Would we want to be forced to do anything else in life, forced to get married, forced to work at a particular job? I don’t think so, so why would we want to be forced to believe in God. Well, I am sure God knows it is better to allow us to decide for ourselves, because God is All-Knowing.
    Okay, I agree that everyone deserves to know God exists, but I do not think that we have any right to dictate to God what evidence He will provide. I believe that God knows what is best.
    I believe He has.
    I think there is a reason why God wants us to have faith instead of providing objective proof, which means some people will have doubts and some people will have no doubts that God exists. I accept that because I accept that God knows more than I do because God is All-Knowing; but of course I accept it because I believe God exists, thus I am not standing out in the cold.

    Now, here is the clincher. According to the Bible and the Baha’i Writings, God knows that in the future everyone will believe in God and know God, so the separation between believers and nonbelievers is just a temporary situation. It was never God’s Will for humans for this to remain forever.

    Jeremiah 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

    Isaiah 11:9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.
    According to my beliefs, God will ensure that everyone is a believer is by exalting the Cause of Baha’u’llah, which is evidence that God exists.
    “The day is approaching when God will have exalted His Cause and magnified His testimony in the eyes of all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth.” Gleanings, p. 248

    So I do not think that God will be changing His Method of providing evidence; God will just ensure that everyone recognizes that evidence, although I have no idea when or how God will do that. God might do something else to ensure that everyone is a believer, I don’t know the ways of God, but if God exalts the Cause of Baha’u’llah in the eyes of everyone, that certainly would do the trick.
    Logically speaking, you are absolutely right about that. How we might discover that a God exists would depend entirely upon the nature of God; so if God was able to be proven empirically we might be able to find empirical proof. I do not believe that will ever be possible because of what I believe the nature of God to be; God is, and has always been, immensely exalted beyond all that can either be recounted or perceived, everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men. In the Bible it says God is spirit, but we cannot even fathom what that means, it simply means God is not a material being.
     
  20. Trailblazer

    Trailblazer Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2017
    Messages:
    20,269
    Ratings:
    +5,363
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Show me where I admitted that an omnipotent God is absurd. Those are your words, not mine.
    God would have the power to do things which are absurd, but God would not do things that are absurd, since God is All-Knowing and All-Wise. :D That means that even if you think it is absurd, it cannot be absurd if God did it.

    So what you see is what you get, logically speaking of course. In other words, if you what you think God should do is wiser than what God did, God would have done it by now.
    Sorry but no. Humans set the standards, but those standards originated in scriptures. They did not just drop out of the sky.

    God does not torture anyone; that is words mean wrote about God from the Bible. Sometimes I think that Book should be burned, every single copy.
    Hypotheticals, Trail. Everything I'm discussing about what God does is hypothetical. I don't think God actually does anything, because I don't think he exists.

    Okay, fair enough. You can say anything you want to about God, but that won’t make it true.
    That is completely true as well as logical, fair and just, because God gave humans a brain and two legs and two hands and free will, as well as natural resources, so we could take care of our world.
    Absolutely not. You just love to pass the buck. Just because God knows what will happen does not mean God is responsible for what happens. People make choices and act on them. Free will is what sinks your ship, right down to the ocean floor.

    In a court of law psychopaths are held accountable because everyone on a jury knows they are responsible. God does not go on trial, except with atheists. They just want to pass the buck. The 100-dollar question is why atheists who believe this way about God would ever want to believe in God. I know I wouldn’t want to believe in a God I think is derelict in His duties. :rolleyes:

    Do you think it is a good idea for you to pursue belief in God, IF that is what you are doing? Maybe it is best to let sleeping gods lie.
    It works almost perfectly, since almost everyone in the world believes in God. If people do not get the latest information, it is not God’s fault. It is there for the taking.
    And if junk food were healthy, everyone would have a six pack. But it isn't, and they don't.

    And whose fault is that if you go down for a six pack instead of eating healthy food? It is not God’s fault, it is your fault. Free will sinks your ship, again.
    It is questionable as to whether people have a choice to believe in God or not, but Imo once someone believes in God, it IS a choice what religion to adhere to.
    So what if God can accurately disseminate information about himself to everyone? God doesn’t choose to do this and is under no obligation to do so. You try to use omnipotence and omniscience to suit you, but you seem to forget that they work against you, because an omnipotent God that has all power does not take orders from humans, and an omniscient God who knows everything knows the best way to communicate to humans.

    It is the epitome of arrogance to dictate to an Almighty God what He should do and how He should do it. I am done with that atheist on my forum after six years, and I am not about to start over with anyone else.

    I am sorry if you do not understand why everyone does not deserve a free ride, why they have to work to obtain a belief and maintain it. Everyone can understand why everyone does not get a PhD sent to them in the mail, just because they want one; they have to pay for their education and work for it. That is how the world works, so there is no reason why belief should work any differently. There are no free rides and there is a reason for that, because then everyone would just sit on their duff and expect someone else to do what they are responsible to do.

    In short, nobody deserves special delivery from God because they can get the same message through general delivery.
    So what, whose fault is that that some people in the class flunk out and some get an A+? You certainly cannot blame God fro human failures unless you are irrational.
    It does not matter what God knows. It is 100% your choice whether you want to choose what God provides or reject it. God does not provide something else because God does not want believers who are not willing to accept what He provides. This is how God separates the wheat from the chaff.
    I would not believe it because there is no REASON to believe it, just because you said so. I am not even suggesting you believe that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God just because He said so. That would be ludicrous because anyone can claim to be a Messenger of God.
    No, it is insane thinking 101 because God is not like “anything else.” God is the incomparable Creator.
    To be clear, all religions as revealed by God were like pure clear water, but later they became contaminated. The older religions have false teachings embedded in them because man has tampered with the original revelations over the centuries. The Bible is an enigma because we do not even know who wrote it. However, Baha’u’llah wrote His own scriptures, and if He is who he claimed to be, a Messenger of God, everything He wrote was true. If He was a false prophet, what He wrote might contain some truth, but that is not the truth from God.
    No, I did not ask you to pretend that God is not omnipotent. I said “Please do not tell me “God is omnipotent so God can do anything.” Do you understand the difference between these two statements? Regardless of God's omnipotence, God has to work within parameters that will work for humans.

    Pretend God is omnipotent and tell me how God accomplish what Baha’u’llah accomplished without Baha’u’llah, or some such Messenger. (As an aside, Baha’u’llah wrote that even if His enemies had succeeded in killing Him, God would raise up another Messenger in His stead. Nobody can stop an omnipotent God from achieving His Purpose.)

    Please remember, God’s Purpose was accomplished whether or not many people know about or believe in Baha’u’llah, because how many people believe something has nothing to do with whether it is true or false. That is the fallacy of argumentum ad populum. The converse of this is that if many or most people do not believe it, it cannot be so, and that is fallacious.
    Good question. Some things that Baha’u’llah did demonstrate that He was supernatural. It was the same with Jesus, but becoming God and rising from the grave were not any of those things.
    Okay then, I think we are done here, because God ain’t coming to earth to confirm who Baha’u’llah was.

    I see no reason for me to post a thread about evidence for Baha’u’llah if you do not consider it rational to believe in Messengers. Besides that, if you are going to hold to your position that God is responsible for what humans do, you would not believe what Baha’u’llah wrote, so what’s the point of believing in Him?

    The thing is, I already told some other people I was going to post it, so I would feel bad not keeping my word.
     
Loading...