Is atheism a religion?

[Trailblazer]

What is the Bible? David Koresh and many millions of people believe it is the Word of God. There is indisputable evidence that David Koresh studied the Bible extensively. What Koresh knew about God he got from the Word of God.

So he studied it, but he sure did not live according to what Jesus taught.

So what if many millions of people believe that the Bible is the Word of God? Does that mean it IS the Word of God?

How many people believe something does not equate to evidence. That is that the fallacy of ad populum.

I believe the Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit but it was written by men and there are a lot of errors in it. Moreover, we do not have the actual words of Jesus; we just have oral tradition. By contrast, we have the actual words of Baha’u’llah penned with His own hand.

What evidence do you have regarding how Balulla got his messages from God?

The evidence is indirect just as the evidence that the Bible is the Word of God is indirect. In other words, there is no actual proof either one is the Word of God.

The way we determine if Baha’u’llah was the Voice of God as He claimed to be is to look at the evidence Baha’u’llah told us to look at:

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106​

 

[Trailblazer]

I asked what evidence you had to lead you to believe he was a true messenger.

You listed:
His Character
His Writings
His Predictions

No, what I listed was what Baha’u’llah said was the evidence (quoted in previous post to you):

His Character (His Own Self)
His Writings (words He revealed)
His Revelation

But below is what I originally listed, which is my own all-inclusive list, from the most important to the least important evidence:

• What He was like as a person (His character);
• What He did during His mission on earth;
• The history of His Cause, from the time He appeared moving forward;
• The scriptures that were attributed to Him or scriptures that He wrote;
• What others have written about Him;
• The Bible prophecies that He fulfilled by His coming,
• The prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled by His coming;
• The predictions He made that have come to pass;
• The religion that He established (followers), what they have done and are doing now.

Note how far down on the list the predictions are.

I pointed out that his character is difficult to ascertain at this late date. However, I subsequently found that he had three wives and then decided he didn't want to live under Islamic law. That does not speak highly of his character. A person of character should have known that polygamy was wrong, regardless of the current laws.

His character is easy to determine because it has been described in various books and many of these people who wrote about Him knew him personally. He was living under Islamic Law when He took the wives. Later, He revealed His own Book of Laws that did not allow for multiple wives. You cannot assume that because He had many wives He was having sex with all these wives. It is not as if He was doing that while in prison and exile for 40 years. As I recall, He only had one wife and a few of His children with Him during part of those years.

His writings are no different from any of hundreds of religionists and philosophers. You don't attribute messenger status based on writings.

I see them as very different, but of course I have read more of them than you have.

That leaves his predictions. Except that they aren't predictions. Even you could not show that they were.

So, you are 0 for 3.

Investigation of a Messenger really does not work that way. You cannot discount all the evidence that is the best evidence and just look at what does not really matter that much for proving His claim(predictions). But His predictions did come true, all of them.

There is no more reason to give exhalted status to Balulla than there is to give it to David Koresh or Sun Myung Moon.

Don’t then. Baha’u’llah clearly said that He did not need anyone’s belief because whatever He did He did only for God. That is quite different from Koresh who tried to garner followers:

“Who can ever believe that this Servant of God hath at any time cherished in His heart a desire for any earthly honor or benefit? The Cause associated with His Name is far above the transitory things of this world. Behold Him, an exile, a victim of tyranny, in this Most Great Prison. His enemies have assailed Him on every side, and will continue to do so till the end of His life. Whatever, therefore, He saith unto you is wholly for the sake of God, that haply the peoples of the earth may cleanse their hearts from the stain of evil desire, may rend its veil asunder, and attain unto the knowledge of the one true God—the most exalted station to which any man can aspire. Their belief or disbelief in My Cause can neither profit nor harm Me. We summon them wholly for the sake of God. He, verily, can afford to dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 85​

 

[Trailblazer]

Now you are just being flat-out disingenuous. All along you've been touting Balula's predictions as one of the things that sets him apart from others.

I never said that the predictions set Him apart from others. I said that they were “part” of the evidence that indicate that He was a Messenger of God (see my bulleted list in previous post).

Now you want to fall back onto: a statement about what you think will happen in the future.

Well, OK.

I predict I am going to spend Christmas day at my daughter's.
I predict it's going to rain in the next five days.

There, that makes me and Ballaula equal in the area of predictions.

The point is that what He predicted came to pass and these were things He could not have known and they were things He had no control over. You can control whether you spend Christmas day at my daughter's. You can know if it is going to rain by looking at the weather forecast.

But we both know that's not what you were referring to when you stated that one of the reasons you believed Ballaula was a Messenger was that he made clear, concise predictions of things that could not be known to him at the time.

No, I never said that the predictions were one of the reasons I believed that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger. I listed them as “part of the evidence” because I wanted to be comprehensive and list ANYTHING that could be considered evidence by other people. I said that I originally became a Baha’i because of the teachings.

He didn't. If you want to use the watered-down definition of: a statement about what you think will happen in the future, then his predictions are worthless and it's childish of you to think any different.

The predictions would be worthless if He just made predictions that never came to pass in the future. The whole point is that they did come to pass. On my original bulleted list says:

• The predictions He made that have come to pass;

 

[Trailblazer]

OK, so tell us who else believes them?

ETA: While you're at it, tell us who, besides Bahai's, even considers them to be predictions.

Anyone who has read them knows that they were predictions and anyone who knows history knows that they came to pass as predicted.

 

[ecco]

The way we determine if Baha’u’llah was the Voice of God as He claimed to be is to look at the evidence Baha’u’llah told us to look at:

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106​

Part of that is in bold italics, part of it is not. All of it is shown to be "Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh"

The definition of gleanings is:

things, especially facts, that are gathered or collected from various sources rather than acquired as a whole.​

So what are you showing me here? What is what?

 

[ecco]

No, what I listed was what Baha’u’llah said was the evidence (quoted in previous post to you):

See my previous post.

 

[ecco]

I never said that the predictions set Him apart from others. I said that they were “part” of the evidence that indicate that He was a Messenger of God (see my bulleted list in previous post).

The point is that what He predicted came to pass and these were things He could not have known and they were things He had no control over. You can control whether you spend Christmas day at my daughter's. You can know if it is going to rain by looking at the weather forecast.

No, I never said that the predictions were one of the reasons I believed that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger. I listed them as “part of the evidence” because I wanted to be comprehensive and list ANYTHING that could be considered evidence by other people. I said that I originally became a Baha’i because of the teachings.

The predictions would be worthless if He just made predictions that never came to pass in the future. The whole point is that they did come to pass. On my original bulleted list says:

• The predictions He made that have come to pass;

I'm done beating your poor dead horse any further.

 

[ecco]

OK, so tell us who else believes them?


ETA: While you're at it, tell us who, besides Bahai's, even considers them to be predictions.

Anyone who has read them knows that they were predictions and anyone who knows history knows that they came to pass as predicted.

So, you can not show one single person, who is not a Bahai, who considers them to be predictions let alone that they have come true. No one.

That's what I thought.


BTW, you misspoke when you said: "Anyone who has read them...". I read two and they are no more predictions than any of Nostradamus' writings.

Also, note that I was being polite when I used the term "misspoke".

 

[Trailblazer]

Part of that is in bold italics, part of it is not. All of it is shown to be "Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh"

All of the quote was from Gleanings. I added the bold and italics for emphasis.

The definition of gleanings is:

things, especially facts, that are gathered or collected from various sources rather than acquired as a whole.

That is true. That is what the book “Gleanings” is.

It is called Gleanings because it is an extraction of information from various Tablets... In the Introduction to Gleanings, which is only in the published book and not online, it explains something about Gleanings:

“Gleanings is a book for meditative study. It is not a book of history and facts, but of love and spiritual power. No one can understand the faith of the thousands of martyred followers of the Bab, unless he catches the spirit of this book. No one can appreciate why thousands of Baha’is give up the comfort of settled homes and move into strange countries to tell the people about Baha’u’llah, unless he clearly glimpses the spirit of this book.” Gleanings

The reason I came to understand about God and Baha’u’llah and how they are connected is because of Gleanings. There are so many other Baha’i books but Gleanings is kind of like a Bible for me, a source of inspiration. It covers many different aspects of the teachings of Baha’u’llah in one small book.

So what are you showing me here? What is what?

As I said above, I added the bold and italics to emphasize the three things that Baha’u’llah considered to be proof of His reality and truth:

1. His own Self
2. His Revelation
3. The words He has revealed

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm done beating your poor dead horse any further.

I am very happy to hear that.
I have three big horses in my barn right now that are alive and kicking me.
I do not need any dead ones.

 

[Trailblazer]

I thought we were done beating this dead horse... Just wishful thinking I guess.

So, you can not show one single person, who is not a Bahai, who considers them to be predictions let alone that they have come true. No one.

That's what I thought.

Why would it matter if I could show that? They are either predictions that came to pass or not. What people “believe” has nothing to do with it.

BTW, you misspoke when you said: "Anyone who has read them...". I read two and they are no more predictions than any of Nostradamus' writings.

Also, note that I was being polite when I used the term "misspoke".

I said: “Anyone who has read them knows that they were predictions and anyone who knows history knows that they came to pass as predicted.”

The word “anyone” was misplaced in that sentence, because not everyone reads and understands the same way. The important thing is that you were polite. Baha’u’llah said that courtesy is the Prince of Virtues.

They were predictions by the definition of the word prediction I gave before. These predictions came to pass, so they were accurate predictions.

e.g.

Baha’u’llah predicted that Napoleon III would fall in battle so he would lose his kingdom:

“Commotions shall seize all the people in that land, unless thou arisest to help this Cause, and followest Him Who is the Spirit of God (Jesus Christ) in this, the Straight Path. Hath thy pomp made thee proud? By My Life! It shall not endure; nay, it shall soon pass away, unless thou holdest fast by this firm Cord.” Proclamation of Baha'u'llah​

Baha’ul’lah predicted WWI and WWII:

“O banks of the Rhine! We have seen you covered with gore, inasmuch as the swords of retribution were drawn against you; and you shall have another turn. And We hear the lamentations of Berlin, though she be today in conspicuous glory.” Proclamation of Bahá’u’lláh, p, 39
​

Now, I am laying my horse to rest if you don’t mind.

 

[ecco]

All of the quote was from Gleanings. I added the bold and italics for emphasis.

That is true. That is what the book “Gleanings” is.

It is called Gleanings because it is an extraction of information from various Tablets

So it's not even the original writings of Balula. It's information ostensibly gleaned from His writings by other mortal non-messenger men. It's their interpretations.

Are there any extant writings from Balula? If there are, why are you quoting gleanings instead of His actual writings?

 

[Trailblazer]

So it's not even the original writings of Balula. It's information ostensibly gleaned from His writings by other mortal non-messenger men. It's their interpretations.

No, it is extracts from various Tablets written by Baha’u’llah, so it is the Original Writings of Baha’u’llah.

Are there any extant writings from Balula? If there are, why are you quoting gleanings instead of His actual writings?

Gleanings is Baha’u’llah’s Original Writings. One reason I quote it is because it has most of the important information that I want to convey all in one book.

It is called Gleanings because it is an extraction of information from various Tablets... From the Introduction of Gleanings:

“Gleanings is excerpts from various Tablets. In the introduction to Gleanings it explains how it is organized into five parts. Part one, pages 1-46, proclaims this as the “Day of God.” Part two, pages 46-136, concerns the Manifestation of God and His significance. Part three, pages 136-200, deals with basic questions concerning the soul and its immortality. Part four, pages 200-259, concerns the spiritual aspects of the World Order and the Most Great Peace. Part five, pages 259-346, deals with the duties of the individual and the spiritual meaning of life.” Gleanings

I have read that only 15% of the Tablets of Baha’u’llah have been translated into English to date, but before he died in 1957, Shoghi Effendi, Guardian of the Baha’i Faith, translated the most important Tablets of Baha’u’llah and complied them into books. Gleanings is one of those books, the book I usually quote. The other books that are available in English can be accessed on this website: The Works of Bahá'u'lláh

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

How many people believe something does not equate to evidence. That is that the fallacy of ad populum.

Hang on - a few posts back, you claimed that the fact there are very few followers of David Koresh is evidence that he wasn't actually a messenger of God... didn't you?

 

[ecco]

.

“Who can ever believe that this Servant of God hath at any time cherished in His heart a desire for any earthly honor or benefit? The Cause associated with His Name is far above the transitory things of this world. Behold Him, an exile, a victim of tyranny, in this Most Great Prison. His enemies have assailed Him on every side, and will continue to do so till the end of His life. Whatever, therefore, He saith unto you is wholly for the sake of God, that haply the peoples of the earth may cleanse their hearts from the stain of evil desire, may rend its veil asunder, and attain unto the knowledge of the one true God—the most exalted station to which any man can aspire. Their belief or disbelief in My Cause can neither profit nor harm Me. We summon them wholly for the sake of God. He, verily, can afford to dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 85

Part of that is in bold italics, part of it is not. All of it is shown to be "Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh"

The definition of gleanings is:
things, especially facts, that are gathered or collected from various sources rather than acquired as a whole.
So what are you showing me here? What is what?

All of the quote was from Gleanings. I added the bold and italics for emphasis.

That is true. That is what the book “Gleanings” is.

It is called Gleanings because it is an extraction of information from various Tablets... In the Introduction to Gleanings, which is only in the published book and not online, it explains something about Gleanings:

Yes, I understand "All of the quote was from Gleanings". That is not my question. My question is what parts are Bahá’u’lláh's writings and what parts are not. From reading your above quoted segment I appears that only the bolded part may have been written by Bahá’u’lláh. The parts not in bold use phrases like:
His work
His enemies
Behold Him

That makes it clear that the author (Effendi?) is writing about Balula.

“Gleanings is a book for meditative study. It is not a book of history and facts, but of love and spiritual power. No one can understand the faith of the thousands of martyred followers of the Bab, unless he catches the spirit of this book. No one can appreciate why thousands of Baha’is give up the comfort of settled homes and move into strange countries to tell the people about Baha’u’llah, unless he clearly glimpses the spirit of this book.” Gleanings

Again, the above-quoted text was clearly not written by Bahá’u’lláh as it discusses the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh

 

[ecco]

it explains something about Gleanings:

To continue on from my previous post...

Following are writings from:
The Hidden Words | Bahá’í Reference Library

SON OF SPIRIT!
My first counsel is this: Possess a pure, kindly and radiant heart, that thine may be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable and everlasting.

2.
O SON OF SPIRIT!
The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.

3.
O SON OF MAN!
Veiled in My immemorial being and in the ancient eternity of My essence, I knew My love for thee; therefore I created thee, have engraved on thee Mine image and revealed to thee My beauty.​

The above is clearly written in the first person. Are these the actual writings of Balluah?


Number two says: "Verily justice is My gift". Justice would be a gift from a god, not from a messenger.

Now let's look at number 3:

My immemorial being
My essence
My love for thee​

These words sound more god-like than sound like they are coming from a mortal messenger.

And then we get to:

I created thee ​

If the writer considers himself to be a creator, then the writer is not thinking of himself as just a messenger.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hang on - a few posts back, you claimed that the fact there are very few followers of David Koresh is evidence that he wasn't actually a messenger of God... didn't you?

No, I never claimed that. Perhaps you misconstrued what I meant by what I said?
I do not have time to look back through my posts because I have too many posts to answer and other things I have to do.

In short, what is evidence that David Koresh was not a Messenger of God was his bad character and his bad deeds and the fact that he had nothing useful to contribute to society, no messages or teachings of any import.

Matthew 7:15-20 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.​

Fruits: the pleasant or successful result of work or actions: FRUIT | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, I understand "All of the quote was from Gleanings". That is not my question. My question is what parts are Bahá’u’lláh's writings and what parts are not. From reading your above quoted segment I appears that only the bolded part may have been written by Bahá’u’lláh. The parts not in bold use phrases like:
His work
His enemies
Behold Him

That makes it clear that the author (Effendi?) is writing about Balula.

Let’s start from scratch.

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106​

That entire quote was written by Baha’u’llah. I added the bold and italics, and the reason I did that was to emphasize what Baha’u’llah considered the testimony that establishes His truth. Note what it says right after the bolded italics: This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. His refers to God’s mercy. Because of God’s mercy, God sent Baha’u’llah who testified of God through Baha’u’llah' Self, Baha’u’llah's Revelation and Baha’u’llah's words.

I understand how confusing this can be, because “He” sometimes refers to Baha’u’llah and other times “He” refers to God. So I substituted the He with who it refers to in order to make the meaning of this quote clearer to you.

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing Baha’u’llah’s truth is Baha’u’llah’s own Self. Next to this testimony is Baha’u’llah’s Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other Baha’u’llah hath established the words God hath revealed as proof of God’s reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of God’s tender mercy unto men. God hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could God, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder God’s Cause in their hearts. God will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will God task a soul beyond its power. God, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106​

Spoiler alert! ~~ Sorry, I was thinking you were referring to the other quote I posted to you before so I replied thinking that, but no harm done, because that quote above is an important quote, so now you can understand what it means... Now on to the other quote, the one you were referring to...

Yes, I understand "All of the quote was from Gleanings". That is not my question. My question is what parts are Bahá’u’lláh's writings and what parts are not. From reading your above quoted segment I appears that only the bolded part may have been written by Bahá’u’lláh. The parts not in bold use phrases like:
His work
His enemies
Behold Him

That makes it clear that the author (Effendi?) is writing about Balula.

Again, let’s start from scratch... The entire quote was written by Baha’u’llah.

“Who can ever believe that this Servant of God hath at any time cherished in His heart a desire for any earthly honor or benefit? The Cause associated with His Name is far above the transitory things of this world. Behold Him, an exile, a victim of tyranny, in this Most Great Prison. His enemies have assailed Him on every side, and will continue to do so till the end of His life. Whatever, therefore, He saith unto you is wholly for the sake of God, that haply the peoples of the earth may cleanse their hearts from the stain of evil desire, may rend its veil asunder, and attain unto the knowledge of the one true God—the most exalted station to which any man can aspire. Their belief or disbelief in My Cause can neither profit nor harm Me. We summon them wholly for the sake of God. He, verily, can afford to dispense with all creatures.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 85​

What you need to understand is that sometimes Baha’u’llah speaks in the first person and sometimes He speaks in the third person, referring to Himself. And sometimes when Baha’u’llah says He, Baha’u’llah is referring to God. It all depends upon the context. Baha’u’llah is referring to Himself in this quote when He says He, His, and Him.

“Who can ever believe that this Servant of God (Baha’u’llah) hath at any time cherished in His heart a desire for any earthly honor or benefit? The Cause associated with His (Baha’u’llah’s) Name is far above the transitory things of this world. Behold Him (Baha’u’llah), an exile, a victim of tyranny, in this Most Great Prison. His (Baha’u’llah’s) enemies have assailed Him (Baha’u’llah) on every side, and will continue to do so till the end of His (Baha’u’llah’s) life. Whatever, therefore, He (Baha’u’llah) saith unto you is wholly for the sake of God, that haply the peoples of the earth may cleanse their hearts from the stain of evil desire, may rend its veil asunder, and attain unto the knowledge of the one true God—the most exalted station to which any man can aspire. Their belief or disbelief in My Cause (Baha’u’llah’s Cause) can neither profit nor harm Me (Baha’u’llah). We (Messengers of God) summon them (the people of the earth) wholly for the sake of God. He (God), verily, can afford to dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 85​

Trailblazer said: ↑
“Gleanings is a book for meditative study. It is not a book of history and facts, but of love and spiritual power. No one can understand the faith of the thousands of martyred followers of the Bab, unless he catches the spirit of this book. No one can appreciate why thousands of Baha’is give up the comfort of settled homes and move into strange countries to tell the people about Baha’u’llah, unless he clearly glimpses the spirit of this book.” Gleanings

ecco said: Again, the above-quoted text was clearly not written by Bahá’u’lláh as it discusses the Bab and Bahá’u’lláh

I am sorry for the confusion. The above quote was not written by Baha’u’llah. It is from the Introduction to Gleanings (that Introduction is not in the Baha’i Reference Library online, only in the printed book). It was written by W. Kenneth Christian and it is about the contents of the book Gleanings.

Dr. William Kenneth Christian (1913 – May 4, 1959) was an American Bahá'í who served on many American Bahá'í institutions including the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States. He was named a Knight of Bahá’u’lláh for pioneering to Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), and also pioneered to Greece and Indonesia.....
Kenneth wrote about the Faith prolifically, beginning with regular contributions to the Bahá'í magazine World Order, from when it began publication in 1936, and articles published in Bahá'í World.[45] He was appointed as an editor of Bahá'í World in 1939, and as an editor of World Order in 1945.[46][47][48]

W. Kenneth Christian - Bahaikipedia, an encyclopedia about the Bahá’í Faith​

 

[Bear Wild]

I realize atheism doesn't claim to be a religion. And I'm only referring to those atheists who feel they must convert God-believers to atheism, or else these God-believers will destroy civilization.

There is an intensity of emotion, an anger, an urgency in these atheists' interactions that remind me of fundamentalist religious adherents. As if the same religious impulses and zeal are operational in both.

That said, I agree that it has bad effects on society when people reject provable knowledge about the physical universe obtained via the scientific method, especially when large groups do so.

Also, the kind of God you believe in matters. A God who commits genocide on innocents, and who commands angels and humans to do likewise; belief in this kind of God will obviously have bad consequences for society. Also, a God who judges small transgressions by torture and execution. Also, a God who promotes an infer role in society for women, for example. Or promotes slavery.

Also, merely claiming that there is intelligent design without demonstrating at least a possible mechanism that the intelligent designer could interact with the physical atoms and molecules to implement his/her design; this is not science, nor is it responsible. For example, you might suppose that the intelligent designer fiddles around with the motions of atoms. But would he/she violate the laws of physics in doing so? There is no known mechanism for this fiddling. And how could anyone, even a super-intellect, possibly know the consequences of doing such a thing? The biochemical systems of life are simply too complex for this kind of predictive power. And why would God even want to micromanage the universe at the atomic level anyway?

Also, claiming that God provides a moral basis for society is false. Especially when the holy books of the revealed religions and revealed spiritual paths are fiction, and clearly and provably contradict science, archaeology, document analysis, and logic.

This world contains pain and suffering. Claiming that God is good but created bad is illogical. Claiming that God is good but he/she allowed for pain and suffering implies God is not so good after all. And claiming that people being tortured to death and animals eating each other alive is desirable for a higher good is an offensive idea. And claiming that God is both good and bad means God is not God.

So within these constraints, atheists should allow for belief in God. But note that such a God has no effect whatsoever on the physical world at all, and his/her influence can only enter into our minds to bring goodness and justice and beauty and joy and peace. Why should anyone object to a God like that?

I would prefer if atheists would limit their critiques of belief in God to critiques of the specific ideas such as I've outlined above. And that they would be calm and rational and polite in their demeanor. I was needlessly a Christian for 30 years because I was offended by the rage of atheists, and so, rejected their views out of hand.

The word atheism only means without belief in a god or goddess - non - theist. Sometimes there is a direct connection between atheists and science. Science is certainty not a religion but a methodology to true to understand the natural world. There are atheists who have a religious outlook and Religious Naturalism certainly falls within this context and others also. After all what is really needed to be called a religion. What are the minimal requirements for one to consider a belief system to be a religions?

 

[Trailblazer]

To continue on from my previous post...

Following are writings from:
The Hidden Words | Bahá’í Reference Library

SON OF SPIRIT!
My first counsel is this: Possess a pure, kindly and radiant heart, that thine may be a sovereignty ancient, imperishable and everlasting.

2.
O SON OF SPIRIT!
The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.

3.
O SON OF MAN!
Veiled in My immemorial being and in the ancient eternity of My essence, I knew My love for thee; therefore I created thee, have engraved on thee Mine image and revealed to thee My beauty.

The above is clearly written in the first person. Are these the actual writings of Balluah?

Yes, these are the actual Writings of Baha’u’llah. What you need to understand is that sometimes Baha’u’llah speaks as a Servant of God, sometimes He speaks as a Messenger of God, and sometime He speaks as the Voice of God – because Baha’u’llah is ALL of these. In the Hidden Words, Baha’u’llah is speaking as the Voice of God.... so in a sense He is speaking as God because in a sense He is God, just not God incarnated in the flesh, but rather a Manifestation of God (which is normally how Baha’is refer to the Messengers of God such as Baha’u’llah).

Number two says: "Verily justice is My gift". Justice would be a gift from a god, not from a messenger.

Now let's look at number 3:

My immemorial being
My essence
My love for thee

These words sound more god-like than sound like they are coming from a mortal messenger.

And then we get to:

I created thee

You are right. All of these Hidden Words are God speaking through Baha’u’llah. God was the Voice, and Baha’u’llah was the Writer.

If the writer considers himself to be a creator, then the writer is not thinking of himself as just a messenger.

No, Baha’u’llah did not consider Himself to be a Creator. God is the only Creator. Baha’u’llah was a Messenger, but He was more than a Messenger. He was a Manifestation of God. He was also a Servant of God. The following quote explains what He was. In this quote Baha’u’llah is taking about the Manifestations of God collectively, but that would include Himself. In this quote, God is referred to as “the Innermost Spirit of Spirits and Eternal Essence of Essences.” In this quote, “these Essences of Being” refers to the Manifestations of God.

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world....... And were any of them to voice the utterance, “I am the Messenger of God,” He, also, speaketh the truth, the indubitable truth.......... For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation. They are all the manifestation of the “Beginning” and the “End,” the “First” and the “Last,” the “Seen” and the “Hidden”—all of which pertain to Him Who is the Innermost Spirit of Spirits and Eternal Essence of Essences. And were they to say, “We are the Servants of God,” this also is a manifest and indisputable fact. For they have been made manifest in the uttermost state of servitude, a servitude the like of which no man can possibly attain. Thus in moments in which these Essences of Being were deep immersed beneath the oceans of ancient and everlasting holiness, or when they soared to the loftiest summits of Divine mysteries, they claimed their utterances to be the Voice of Divinity, the Call of God Himself.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 54-55​