samtonga43
Well-Known Member
And there we have it.I just thought of an answer to your question. I cannot speak for other believers but I follow God because I am afraid of Him. I am sure you have heard the expression Fear of God.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
And there we have it.I just thought of an answer to your question. I cannot speak for other believers but I follow God because I am afraid of Him. I am sure you have heard the expression Fear of God.
Suppose you have the freedom to choose only good actions. How can all alternatives always be equally good? If there is a need for action how can doing nothing be good?Why? You haven't explained this.
There would still be the ability to choose from any number of different actions at any given time.
Does the fact that [concept that has no meaning to us because it doesn't exist] doesn't exist mean that we don't have free will and are just puppets?
Obviously not.
Same would apply if the concept of evil had never existed.
You said...I already explained this.
What you said is illogical because all of God's laws do not pertain to evil acts.
Some sex is against god's law. And if evil is committed by "not adhering to god's law", then homosexual sex is evil.Sex is not an evil act, so breaking the Law pertaining to homosexuality does not make one evil.
Sex is not an evil act]/quote] Is rape evil?
Why do all options need to be equally good?Suppose you have the freedom to choose only good actions. How can all alternatives always be equally good?
So you accept that without evil, we still have free will and are not puppets.If there is a need for action how can doing nothing be good?
If the messenger says that god says that some people should be tortured to death, and believers torture some people to death, who is responsible for those people being tortured to death?The message is from God, so it is God's responsibility, but what people do with it is their own responsibility since we all have free will.
That was what you implied by saying that we need proof that god spoke to them before accepting their claims.I never made such an argument.
So if someone said that god spoke to them and their message replaces Bahaullah's, you would accept their claims on faith?I fact, I said we have to accept their claims on faith since there is no proof.
We have been through this many times. You do not have evidence, you have belief.I have also said I do not need proof because I have evidence.
That whole thing is based on question begging. It assumes the conclusion that a god exists before presenting your argument for god existing. If there is no god, there are therefore no messengers of god. So, you first have to prove the existence of god before you can claim he sent any messengers.The claims of Baha’u’llah and the evidence that supports the claims of Baha’u’llah are in this post:
Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah
Are you seriously claiming that no "messenger of god" ever did anything bad?No, that is not what I said. You twisted what I said and made a straw man.
I said we could blame the Messengers if they had bad actions since they should know better. Since they do not have bad actions we cannot blame them.
You said that it wasn't explained because we don't need to know it.That’s your problem, not mine.
He might have been making it up.I know it is so different because Baha’u’llah wrote that.
You don't "know", you "believe".I know something as I know it will be different from this world.
What did Bahaullah say about it?I have no idea.
But you only believe he was a messenger of god because he said he was. So, before you believed he was a messenger of god, why did you believe him when he said he was?We FIRST believe that He was a Messenger of God, and then e believe what He says.
Same thing. Of all the religious texts I have read, Bahaullah's are the worst for meaningless platitudes.No, just passages.
So why does god make your life hell on earth if he is going to make it all better soon? What is the point? What does he hope to achieve?I cannot argue with that because that is essentially what it is, hell on earth with promises of heaven.
Yeah, not really at all. And I am not complaining about life. I think it's great. I am asking why god makes some people suffer while making life easy for others. It makes no sense, unless it is all just a combination of chance and environment.How much have you suffered? From what you have said it is not much. I am the one who should be complaining.
But with anything that has been ordained and made happen by god, we can have no free will.No, that is not true because not everything has been ordained and manifested by God. Some things tat happen are subject to free will.
*sigh*That is not what I said, that is just what you twisted what I said to mean....
So we are just subject to god's whim, no matter how irrational.I said God only does what He chooses to do, and He can do whatever He chooses to do.
That makes no sense.That is easy to answer. God created us out of His love for us.
So we agree that there is no point and no need for the universe or humanity to exist.That is correct. God does not need us to exist because God has no needs at all..
That is correct. Non-existence would be preferable to the suffering experienced by many through what God "has ordained and manifested".
That is also correct.
Civilisation orders behaviours and conditions are directly just a human choice.You said that it wasn't explained because we don't need to know it.
If I need to know it, then it should have been explained. Unless you were wrong. So, any other ideas?
He might have been making it up.
You don't "know", you "believe".
What did Bahaullah say about it?
But you only believe he was a messenger of god because he said he was. So, before you believed he was a messenger of god, why did you believe him when he said he was?
Same thing. Of all the religious texts I have read, Bahaullah's are the worst for meaningless platitudes.
So why does god make your life hell on earth if he is going to make it all better soon? What is the point? What does he hope to achieve?
Yeah, not really at all. And I am not complaining about life. I think it's great. I am asking why god makes some people suffer while making life easy for others. It makes no sense, unless it is all just a combination of chance and environment.
But with anything that has been ordained and made happen by god, we can have no free will.
How do you know what has been ordained by god and what is just random stuff happening?
Although, because god knowns everything that will happen, it's not just random. There is only one possible outcome for every event - which is also problematic for free will.
Without (possibility of) evil/less good we will have no options. We would be programmed to always take action and we would always have one option - the most good action. That's puppets with no freedom.Why do all options need to be equally good?
So you accept that without evil, we still have free will and are not puppets.
I could choose to do nothing rather than something because you have already chosen to do something rather than nothing, and the need only requires one person to act.
I believe that the souls of all humans come into existence at the time of conception, and later they are born with physical bodies.
However, I believe that the souls of the Prophets are different. I believe their souls had pre-existence in the spiritual world and later their souls were sent by God to earth to unite with their bodies and then they were born into this world.
The Prophets, unlike us, are pre-existent. The soul of Christ existed in the spiritual world before His birth in this world. We cannot imagine what that world is like, so words are inadequate to
picture His state of being.
(Shoghi Effendi: High Endeavors, Page: 71)
The word "benevolent" has a meaning.No, you do not know that, you just believe that. It is only your personal opinion based upon what YOU consider benevolent.
Why not? I would if I were god. Wouldn't you?God is not going to prevent all suffering.
So you think that god is not loving, but you believe that he is loving.That is just my personal opinion that God is not loving, it is not my belief.
So you favour an illogical argument for god over a logical one against god.The only logical alternative is that there is no God.
Who mentioned getting what you want? The point is that if god deliberately designed a universe to include a lot of unnecessary suffering, then god is a twat and doesn't deserve to be worshiped.I do not base my worship on whether I get what I ant. that is childish.
But as it is part of god's perfect plan, the best way to achieve his goals, why do you even consider it to be suffering?I think it sucks because I am the one who has been suffering constantly,
There is nothing logical about it. As god can do anything, he could accomplish his plan without anyone suffering.but that does not mean I cannot think logically and realize that it is the best possible way to accomplish God's plan.
It is still suffering
Using all this new-found logic of yours, can you explain why it is so important to god that you suffer so much, while I don't suffer at all?for me even if it is what God wants. I have the ability to separate those two things because I know that I have an emotional part and a logical part. I do not have to like what God wants just because I understand it.
Oh dear god!You do not know what God with those qualities would do, you just have ego projections about what you believe He would do if He has those qualities.
Oh, fas! So how do you define "benevolent"? (Omni in this context just means "all", "most", etc. It does not affect the definition of the word)I do not define it. That word is not even in the Writings of Baha'u'llah and I do not know where it originated. The word benevolent is in the Writings, not omni-benevolent
*sigh* Here we go again.That is not my ego talking, it is my mind.
*bigger sigh*i know God is not ripping the limbs off every living creature so it is a moot point if that would be benevolent.
In that thread about Islam, what was it that Abdul Baha' claimed? That Muhammad didn't do anything evil? That he did kill people, but it was justified because it was in self-defense? And even if Baha'is find a way to make Muhammad "sinless" and "perfect", the Bible has Moses disobeying God and killing a guy. So, even the Bible doesn't try to make Moses out to be a "perfect" and "sinless" manifestation of God.Are you seriously claiming that no "messenger of god" ever did anything bad?
Muhammad had people tortured to death and executed helpless prisoners. He kept and traded slaves. You don't think that is "bad"? Yikes!
I believe they are different because God made them that way.Why would a prophets soul be all that different from the rest of us?
Why would we not have been there “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:7)
Have what? Another understated criticism of me implying that I do not follow God for the "right reason"?And there we have it.
I do not believe that homosexual sex is evil since sex is not evil.You said...
"evil is acts committed by man because man does not adhere to God's Laws."
Are you now saying that you didn't mean that?
Some sex is against god's law. And if evil is committed by "not adhering to god's law", then homosexual sex is evil.
Those people.If the messenger says that god says that some people should be tortured to death, and believers torture some people to death, who is responsible for those people being tortured to death?
I never said that we need proof that God spoke to them before accepting their claims.That was what you implied by saying that we need proof that god spoke to them before accepting their claims.
No, I would not, because Baha'u'llah wrote that anyone who laid claim to a Revelation direct from God, before the expiration of a full thousand years (before 2852 AD) would eb a lying imposter.So if someone said that god spoke to them and their message replaces Bahaullah's, you would accept their claims on faith?
I have belief which is based upon the evidence.We have been through this many times. You do not have evidence, you have belief.
There is no assumption that God exists, there is belief based upon the evidence.That whole thing is based on question begging. It assumes the conclusion that a god exists before presenting your argument for god existing. If there is no god, there are therefore no messengers of god. So, you first have to prove the existence of god before you can claim he sent any messengers.
That is a straw man since I have said repeatedly that the claim IS NOT the evidence.There is also the laughable claim by Bahaullah that the evidence for him being a messenger of god is him claiming that he is a messenger of god.
No Messenger of God ever did anything 'bad' in the sight of God.Are you seriously claiming that no "messenger of god" ever did anything bad?
Muhammad had people tortured to death and executed helpless prisoners. He kept and traded slaves. You don't think that is "bad"? Yikes!
Does the world revolve around you? Should it have been revealed just because YOU need to know?You said that it wasn't explained because we don't need to know it.
If I need to know it, then it should have been explained. Unless you were wrong. So, any other ideas?
Nothing, because we do not need to know and could never understand it.What did Bahaullah say about it?
No, I do not believe he was a messenger of God because he said he was. I have told you that umpteen million times. I believe based upon the evidence, NOT the claim.But you only believe he was a messenger of god because he said he was. So, before you believed he was a messenger of god, why did you believe him when he said he was?
Fine then, you are free to believe that, but if you believe that why are we still discussing this?Same thing. Of all the religious texts I have read, Bahaullah's are the worst for meaningless platitudes.
Spiritual growth.So why does god make your life hell on earth if he is going to make it all better soon? What is the point? What does he hope to achieve?
You tell me and then we will both know, and I am the one who should be complaining because I got the short end of the stick, and I have endured endless suffering, through no fault of my own.Yeah, not really at all. And I am not complaining about life. I think it's great. I am asking why god makes some people suffer while making life easy for others. It makes no sense, unless it is all just a combination of chance and environment.
That is true, but not everything has been ordained and made happen by God, only some things have been. Please refer back to the OP, I explained it there.But with anything that has been ordained and made happen by god, we can have no free will.
We cannot know what has been ordained by God vs. what happened as a result of free will.How do you know what has been ordained by god and what is just random stuff happening?
Although, because god knowns everything that will happen, it's not just random. There is only one possible outcome for every event - which is also problematic for free will.