Atheist looking for religious debate. Any religion. Let's see if I can be convinced.

[samtonga43]

Yes, I had to have some faith in order to believe

Why?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why?

Because nobody can ever see God.

 

[samtonga43]

Because nobody can ever see God.

Are you saying that you had faith in God and then you believed in God?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

belief is not rational or irrational, belief just is.

Disagree. If a belief is supported by evidence, then it is rational to hold that belief to the degree that the evidence supports. Belief acquired without that evidence is irrational belief. When an atheist tells you that he doesn't believe in gods because he needs evidence before believing and he doesn't have it, he is being rational. Reason supports his position. If he goes further and says that gods don't exist, now he is taking a leap of faith, which means holding insufficiently evidenced beliefs, and that last claim is as irrational as believing gods do exist without adequate evidentiary support.

Incidentally, irrational is only a criticism when referring to thought and belief not arrived at solely through valid reasoning. Much of conscious content is other kinds of apprehensions, like thirst, or being bored, or being sleepy, or enjoying the taste of chocolate ice cream more than vanilla. There are no right or wrong reasons for any of these. Reason/ rationality only comes into play when making decisions, such as choosing chocolate ice cream knowing that one will enjoy it more than vanilla. The preference for chocolate is not rational, because it wasn't derived using reason, but the choice to order it to have a better experience is rational. It's based in reason and (prior) evidence.

The value of rational thought is in successfully managing irrational experience. It is this irrational aspect of conscious experience that gives life meaning. It's the experience of the ice cream that matters, the reasoning being of value only insofar as it leads one to choices that maximize irrational experience (more happiness, less unhappiness). To illustrate this, recall that the anhedonia (can't feel happiness) of severe depression causes many to lose interest in living. Even if his reasoning skills are impeccable, if there are no irrational experiences like experiencing humor or enjoying good company because you can't have those irrational experiences, reason has nothing to do, is of little value, and if that's all there is in one's head, living life loses value.

I never forget this. Reason is the rider, irrational passions the horse. It's the passions, which are irrational in the sense that they are discovered rather than the product of reasoning, that give life meaning - not the reasoning. So I don't disesteem the irrational except in deciding what is true, and making correct decisions that maximize desirable outcomes while minimizing undesirable ones. It is only in this arena that I condemn irrationality.

Just because you think it is irrational that does not make it irrational.

If a belief is not sufficiently supported by reason applied to evidence, it is irrational and probably wrong.

A skilled critical thinker's main skill is recognizing rational thought and distinguishing it from irrational thought. Such a person is qualified to judge the irrational thinking of others as such.

Your definition of truth may be different from mine. Using mine, I conclude that there is only one path to truth. When I see others claiming truth that was arrived at without sufficient evidentiary support, I disregard their claim that what they believe is truth.

One illustration: There is only one set of rational rules for addition. 2+3 must always equal 5 for the adding to be rational (according to reason). In order to successfully add a column of numbers, every step in the process must be rational. 7+6 must always equal 13. 5+3 must always equal 8. As long as one sticks with reason alone, that is adding without using some irrational rule such as 5+6 equals 12, he will arrive at the truth, the correct sum. If there is even one deviation from strict reasoning, the answer will be wrong, except in the exceedingly rare event that two mistakes that cancel one another were made, which is about what the chances of arriving at the truth (correct sum) using irrational steps is, and why I say that faith-based (irrational, or insufficiently evidenced beliefs) are virtually always wrong.

So yes, there are people qualified to judge when somebody else's thinking is irrational.

why does it bother bothers other people so much that I believe with certainty?

I don't know if it bothers people that you or anybody else does that. It doesn't bother me. I translate such comments into my own language. She's certain, and given her method of arriving at her certain position, it is probably wrong. Believing by faith is guessing, and there are orders of magnitude more ways to guess wrongly than correctly.

Many people, but not most, are aware of the limits of knowledge not just for themselves, but for humankind. They know when others are making claims about reality that they can't know are correct. The can tell us that they are certain, but that doesn't mean that they are correct - just that they don't appreciate what philosophic doubt is.

For the experienced critical thinker, even when he feels no doubt (psychological doubt, or the feeling of uncertainty), he understands the limits of his knowledge and acknowledges that all of his beliefs about the world are tentative, that is, less than 100% certain (philosophical doubt, which is understood but not felt). And he knows that however certain the other guy may claim to be, that doesn't translate into he cannot be wrong.

And so what if most Baha's do want it to be true?

It's a problem if it affects their judgment of whether it is true. You probably know how medical trials are conducted using double blinding of both the patient and clinician regarding who gets the therapy being studied and who gets placebo. They probably both want it to be true that the therapy works, and know that the placebo doesn't. If they know which is the case, then it clouds their judgment (confirmation bias).

Look what happened to the ID people because they brought an unscientific approach to their work - the search for what they hoped was there. They kept finding it (irreducible complexity) even when it wasn't there.

The search for truth requires impartial, dispassionate evaluation. Reading the words of Bah'u'llah wanting them to be true is as much an impediment to an impartial evaluation as wanting them to be false is. Both establish confirmation biases that cloud judgment. One cannot arrive at truth unless one is willing and able to go where the evidence leads him rather than to what he wants to be true or untrue.

 

[CG Didymus]

This is not really about quantity and rapidity, it is all about quality.

Yes, it's what he said not how fast he said it.

A good Metephor of the Holy Spirit is represented by the rays that eminate from the sun.

The rays of the Sun? That's the energy and heat we get from the Sun, because it is burning. So what is the energy we get from God? Calling something the Holy Spirit makes it sound like some kind of spirit being. And, since some Christians make the Holy Spirit exactly that and a part of God, then to me it makes sense that Jesus has God send this spirit being to his followers to guide them.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.​

Since the gospels and Acts were written way later, there was time for legends and traditions to emerge. And, because Pentecost had already happened, any "prophecy" about the coming of the Holy Spirit could have been written in to the gospel story to coincide with the story in Acts. Or, they were real predictions by Jesus that the Holy Spirit would descend on them on Pentecost. But I think it is forcing it a bit to make it a prophecy about Baha'u'llah. That would mean the prophecy skipped two of the people Baha'is recognize as manifestations, Muhammad and the Bab, and go right to Baha'u'llah. Unless you make it a prophecy about all of them.

 

[CG Didymus]

Baha'is are human so they will have differing viewpoints. Some will be more liberal and some more conservative but that does not have to divide us. We are all Baha'is under the Covenant of Baha'u'llah.

That has divided other religions and the liberal side of a religion is completely different in their beliefs as the conservative side. It could be something as simple as beer. I could see a liberal side of the Baha'i Faith that wants to drink once in a while. And they bend the laws a little. The conservative side, who let's say has more people in positions of leadership, says "no" the law is clear, no alcohol. And because they have the power and authority they sanction those liberal boozing Baha'is. Smoking pot could be another divisive issue.

And for sure, the laws are clear, but that's how liberals are. They don't like strict, authoritative rules. They have a looser interpretation. And I already saw this. My Baha'i friends were very liberal and were always in trouble with their more authoritative LSA's.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, it's what he said not how fast he said it.

The rays of the Sun? That's the energy and heat we get from the Sun, because it is burning. So what is the energy we get from God? Calling something the Holy Spirit makes it sound like some kind of spirit being. And, since some Christians make the Holy Spirit exactly that and a part of God, then to me it makes sense that Jesus has God send this spirit being to his followers to guide them.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. 2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. 4 All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them.​

Since the gospels and Acts were written way later, there was time for legends and traditions to emerge. And, because Pentecost had already happened, any "prophecy" about the coming of the Holy Spirit could have been written in to the gospel story to coincide with the story in Acts. Or, they were real predictions by Jesus that the Holy Spirit would descend on them on Pentecost. But I think it is forcing it a bit to make it a prophecy about Baha'u'llah. That would mean the prophecy skipped two of the people Baha'is recognize as manifestations, Muhammad and the Bab, and go right to Baha'u'llah. Unless you make it a prophecy about all of them.

Abdu'lbaha has explained all this in great detail in Some Answered Questions CG. We have been over it numerous times.

I will offer that Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah are foretold in the Bible.

It has been offered to us that the entire reason for all the Mesengers and their Messages to date (so that is the entire Bible), have been given to us to prepare us for this day, the day of God, the Father, who has been made known to us by Baha'u'llah, the Glory of God.

It is all about our own choice to investigate and the best place to investigate is the source.

"Great indeed is this Day! The allusions made to it in all the sacred Scriptures as the Day of God attest its greatness. The soul of every Prophet of God, of every Divine Messenger, hath thirsted for this wondrous Day. All the divers kindreds of the earth have, likewise, yearned to attain it. No sooner, however, had the Daystar of His Revelation manifested itself in the heaven of God’s Will, than all, except those whom the Almighty was pleased to guide, were found dumbfounded and heedless."

(Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, VII)

All the answers you ask of in this post are in Some Answered Questions CG, it has to be your choice to read them.

Spoiler: Some Answered Questions

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

Are you saying that you had faith in God and then you believed in God?

No, but I had to have faith that 'God could exist' before I could believe that God exists.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

We must first believe that it is possible for God to exist, and that requires faith since no man has ever seen God. God wants us to have faith and that explains why God does not provide absolute proof. I believe that God will reward those who earnestly seek Him with the evidence we need to believe, but God will not force us to accept the evidence. That is a choice.

 

[Trailblazer]

And for sure, the laws are clear, but that's how liberals are. They don't like strict, authoritative rules. They have a looser interpretation. And I already saw this. My Baha'i friends were very liberal and were always in trouble with their more authoritative LSA's.

There is no other interpretation of the law regarding the consumption of alcohol. The law says we are not supposed to drink any alcohol, but Baha'is can still drink in their own home if they want to because nobody can stop them.

 

[Secret Chief]

Spoiler: Some Answered Questions

Some Answered Questions | Bahá’í Reference Library

Regards Tony

There's a section on Strikes! Who knew? Well not me. But anyway, in essence capitalism is fine, so don't go on strike.

"the workers should not make excessive demands, be recalcitrant, ask for more than they deserve, or go on strike. They should obey and comply"

God certainly moves in mysterious ways, or at least isn't in favour of a socialist economy.

 

[CG Didymus]

I don't know if it bothers people that you or anybody else does that. It doesn't bother me. I translate such comments into my own language. She's certain, and given her method of arriving at her certain position, it is probably wrong. Believing by faith is guessing, and there are orders of magnitude more ways to guess wrongly than correctly.

Religion is just weird. So many of us were taught about religion by people we trusted were telling us the truth. So we assumed it was the way things are. I remember, I was raised Catholic, looking up at the clouds and expecting to see angels.

But all that is just so close to being told about Santa. Later, it becomes clear that there is no Santa. Belief in the religious things takes longer for some of us to question, but many of us do. One problem is we see some of those people we trusted, like parents or a preacher, act in ways that go against what they claim to believe. So we stop trusting them.

With the Baha'i Faith, Baha'is have come to trust Baha'u'llah and the whole Baha'i religion. It makes sense to them. It is such a practical religion. They see teachings in it that very well could, if applied, change the world for the better. But, for those that have come to doubt religion, they see the bad side of religion too. Taking it too literal. Forcing it on others. Forcing their moral beliefs on others. All those things could happen with the Baha'i Faith too.

So are they sure it's for real? Of course some of them do. And how far are they willing to go? Right now they only have power over their own people. And many of the rules they don't enforce. But, they have a system in place that is set up to govern the whole world. What if they got control? What if a majority of people took the Baha'i Faith as the absolute, unquestionable truth from God? A God that is invisible and unknowable... except for what Baha'u'llah has told us about him?

So right now, we can see... Is the Baha'i Faith working? Or are there problems? If they were in control, what are the laws that they impose? They might say they won't, but if they believe these laws are from God, and are necessary to bring peace and harmony to the world, why wouldn't they, if they had the control, impose them?

 

[CG Didymus]

There is no other interpretation of the law regarding the consumption of alcohol. The law says we are not supposed to drink any alcohol, but Baha'is can still drink in their own home if they want to because nobody can stop them.

You know there are ways to interpret things anyway a person wants to. Like, "I think Baha'u'llah was being symbolic." "I don't think he meant a glass of wine with dinner." But, at some point the Faith is going to get bigger. The Baha'is are not going to enforce their laws? If not, then what good are they? And, I doubt very much that a Baha'i that drinks only does it in their home.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There's a section on Strikes! Who knew? Well not me. But anyway, in essence capitalism is fine, so don't go on strike.

"the workers should not make excessive demands, be recalcitrant, ask for more than they deserve, or go on strike. They should obey and comply"

God certainly moves in mysterious ways, or at least isn't in favour of a socialist economy.

The good thing is we have to balance that with the advice the bosses and owners of companies also get.

Sorry ran out of time. Look those up and you will get a better vision of what was offered.

Regards Tony

 

[Secret Chief]

The good thing is we have to balance that with the advice the bosses and owners of companies also get.

Sorry ran out of time. Look those up and you will get a better vision of what was offered.

Regards Tony

Yes, I read that too. Tweak the status quo.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

There is no other interpretation of the law regarding the consumption of alcohol. The law says we are not supposed to drink any alcohol, but Baha'is can still drink in their own home if they want to because nobody can stop them.

That is true in all Faiths. Submission to the law is a personal choice, Judaism and Isalm were excellent examples of submission in Faith to the given law.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

You know there are ways to interpret things anyway a person wants to. Like, "I think Baha'u'llah was being symbolic." "I don't think he meant a glass of wine with dinner." But, at some point the Faith is going to get bigger. The Baha'is are not going to enforce their laws? If not, then what good are they? And, I doubt very much that a Baha'i that drinks only does it in their home.

I have no idea what will happen after the Faith gets bigger, only God knows the future, but if Baha'is went to bars I imagine that they would be reprimanded by the LSA and I don't know what else. If they identified as Baha'is and were flagrantly drunk they could have their voting rights taken away.

“The beginning of all things is the knowledge of God, and the end of all things is strict observance of whatsoever hath been sent down from the empyrean of the Divine Will that pervadeth all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 5

 

[CG Didymus]

Abdu'lbaha has explained all this in great detail in Some Answered Questions CG. We have been over it numerous times.

I will offer that Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah are foretold in the Bible.

Yes, I've read what Abdul Baha' said about the resurrection.

Therefore, we say that the meaning of Christ’s resurrection is as follows: the disciples were troubled and agitated after the martyrdom of Christ. The Reality of Christ, which signifies His teachings, His bounties, His perfections and His spiritual power, was hidden and concealed for two or three days after His martyrdom, and was not resplendent and manifest. No, rather it was lost, for the believers were few in number and were troubled and agitated. The Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body; and when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him, the Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared; His religion found life; His teachings and His admonitions became evident and visible. In other words, the Cause of Christ was like a lifeless body until the life and the bounty of the Holy Spirit surrounded it.​

Then there is the "Three Woes"...

The first woe is the appearance of the Prophet, Muḥammad, the son of ‘Abdu’lláh—peace be upon Him! The second woe is that of the Báb—to Him be glory and praise! The third woe is the great day of the manifestation of the Lord of Hosts and the radiance of the Beauty of the Promised One. The explanation of this subject, woe, is mentioned in the thirtieth chapter of Ezekiel, where it is said: “The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Howl ye, Woe worth the day! For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near.”​

Yes, we've been over it many times and it still doesn't make sense. You like it. You believe it, fine. Again, I think the resurrection story is told and meant to be believed as an actual event. Baha'is take it as an allegorical story. I don't think it is. And, if it didn't really happen, then I wouldn't call it an "allegorical" story, I'd call it a made up, fictional lie.

And the Three Woes? There's more "Woes" in the Book of Revelation and Baha'is don't make them into "manifestations" The Woes seem to be bad things, judgements coming to the evil people on Earth, those that didn't believe in God's Son, Jesus. The things that happen during each Woe don't match very well with Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah. From Revelation 8:13...

13 As I watched, I heard an eagle that was flying in midair call out in a loud voice: “Woe! Woe! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels!”​

All the trumpet blasts had been bad things, so this eagle says, "“Woe! Woe! Woe!" because of the trumpet blasts. So what were those trumpet blasts? Bad stuff goin' down. Anyway, religions got to do things to get people to believe. "Proving" and "showing" how your guy was prophesied about and he fulfilled those prophecies is part of it. But just like other religions, Baha'is make things prophecies that don't sound like they were meant to be prophecies... but they find a way to make them work.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Religion is just weird. So many of us were taught about religion by people we trusted were telling us the truth. So we assumed it was the way things are. I remember, I was raised Catholic, looking up at the clouds and expecting to see angels.

Baha'u'llah offers that is the challenge for all Messengers, they know what they will face, the rejection of the intrenched beliefs of the masses. Many are called few are chosen at the birth of all Faiths.

There is a reason all Messengers go into seclusion before tackling the Message on the front line.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

No, but I had to have faith that 'God could exist' before I could believe that God exists.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

We must first believe that it is possible for God to exist, and that requires faith since no man has ever seen God. God wants us to have faith and that explains why God does not provide absolute proof. I believe that God will reward those who earnestly seek Him with the evidence we need to believe, but God will not force us to accept the evidence. That is a choice.

Funny you quote the NT. But people do believe in different concepts of who God is. Trinitarian Christians have gotten "proof". One guy I know was stuck on a mountain. it was easy claiming up, but he couldn't see the foothold going down. After a while, he decided he had to just go for it. He prayed and said that he felt the hand of God pushing him toward the rock and guiding his foot. But... that's not the real God! Baha'is say that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are not part of God, so this guy prayed to and was saved by a make believe God? Did he just imagine it? Or what?

Strange and miraculous things happen to those that believe... no matter what they believe. And, for them, it's proof that what they believe is true.

 

[CG Didymus]

That is true in all Faiths. Submission to the law is a personal choice, Judaism and Isalm were excellent examples of submission in Faith to the given law.

Regards Tony

They sometimes enforced their laws. So for the law-breaker, it was a bad personal choice to go against God's, supposed, law. You know, things like picking up firewood on the wrong day. Getting too excited about someone and going too far, and then getting caught.