Trailblazer
Veteran Member
That is correct, the way we know what is good and evil is by what God says it is, but we then need free will to choose between good and evil.We don't need free will, when you just said that we can't judge God and what he does as being good or evil. Therefore we have no clue what is good and evil using our free will. So the only logic way to decide what is good and evil is looking at what God say it is.
Once we accept that a religion is the truth from God then we do not question the teachings and laws, because that would be akin to saying we know more than God, which is impossible, since God is All-Knowing. However, we need free will in order to choose to follow the teachings and laws of the religion.Exactly as you write here: "...best for us so we follow His rules and do not question them." so there is no need for free will.
I do not believe God is immoral based upon the stories written about God in the OT, which is just a human representation and anthropomorphizing of God.And I simply don't agree with that, because God is immoral, so I don't think we should simply follow his rules without questioning them. Would you agree that what you wrote here contradict the need for free will that you wrote just before?
I guess you need to understand what I mean by free will:
Question.—Is man a free agent in all his actions, or is he compelled and constrained?
Answer.—This question is one of the most important and abstruse of divine problems. If God wills, another day, at the beginning of dinner, we will undertake the explanation of this subject in detail; now we will explain it briefly, in a few words, as follows. Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man. But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.
For example, if he wishes, he can pass his time in praising God, or he can be occupied with other thoughts. He can be an enkindled light through the fire of the love of God, and a philanthropist loving the world, or he can be a hater of mankind, and engrossed with material things. He can be just or cruel. These actions and these deeds are subject to the control of the will of man himself; consequently, he is responsible for them. Some Answered Questions, p. 248
From: 70: FREE WILL
Answer.—This question is one of the most important and abstruse of divine problems. If God wills, another day, at the beginning of dinner, we will undertake the explanation of this subject in detail; now we will explain it briefly, in a few words, as follows. Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man. But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.
For example, if he wishes, he can pass his time in praising God, or he can be occupied with other thoughts. He can be an enkindled light through the fire of the love of God, and a philanthropist loving the world, or he can be a hater of mankind, and engrossed with material things. He can be just or cruel. These actions and these deeds are subject to the control of the will of man himself; consequently, he is responsible for them. Some Answered Questions, p. 248
From: 70: FREE WILL
"I do not trust anything that was written that long ago and written by men." how is that not a contradiction to "Sure, there is a lot of spiritual truth in the Bible but there is also a lot that is no longer valid."
The spiritual truth (the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey) will always be valid, because spiritual truth never changes over time, but all the details in the Bible and the stories are not literally true.
From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice:
In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)
...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words.
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)
The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
In studying the Bible Bahá'ís must bear two principles in mind. The first is that many passages in Sacred Scriptures are intended to be taken metaphorically, not literally, and some of the paradoxes and apparent contradictions which appear are intended to indicate this. The second is the fact that the text of the early Scriptures, such as the Bible, is not wholly authentic.
(28 May 1984 to an individual believer)
...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words.
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)
The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
You just wrote that you don't trust what they wrote as it was written by men, and the very next sentence you say that there is a lot of spiritual truth in it. How do you know, what is true and what is not true, when you wrote that you don't trust what was written. And it was the very thing we just talked about, that you can not cherry pick from the bible in regards to what you think is true or not, as it makes no sense, because its impossible to figure out which of these stories about God's nature is then true or not.
Do you know what I mean by the spiritual truths, the essential elements that God’s Manifestations intended to convey? It is impossible to figure out which of these stories about God's nature is then true or not so I just discount the stories because I cannot trust them. I do not need the Bible to understand God’s nature because I have the Writings of Baha’u’llah that are authentic.
Everyone has to decide that for themselves. If you think you have evidence that is sufficient then you can make a decision but if you don’t you should withhold belief until you feel confident with your evidence.You are contradicting yourself now, this you wrote in the former reply, which was why I answered you: "But we can never prove God exists, so at some point we have to come to a decision one way or another, or we can remain on the fence and be agnostic, which is a respectable position."
So we shouldn't come to a decision or is the most reasonable one that we don't know if we have no evidence?
That does not matter because there is only one God. At some point, if one wants to believe in God, they have to pick the religion and the conception of God that makes the most sense to them, and that will be the religion that has the evidence that convinces them.Because the other 60% doesn't believe in the same God, they might share "name" but that is it. If you asked them what their idea of God is, it would be rather different from what you believe, even among Christians this varies greatly, because as I said people cherry pick what they want, haven't read the bible, gotten their information from others preaching to them and last but not least they just make up things that seems to fit for them. And its the same for all religions.