I do not know what you mean, an objective reason to think that Baha’u’llah proves god.
You don't seem to be able to make up your mind. You have claimed that Baha’u’llah proves god but you haven't given us any objective evidence, it seems to be blind faith. If there
was an objective reason to think that, then we'd have objective evidence for god, which you keep saying is impossible.
No, nobody can analyze, measure, observe, examine or evaluate God so there can never be any objective evidence for God.
See above.
What does objective evidence mean?
Objective evidence refers to information based on facts that can be proved by means of search like analysis, measurement, and observation.
One can examine and evaluate objective evidence.
What does objective evidence mean?
I know what objective evidence means. It's very tedious when you clutter up your posts with things pretty much everybody knows.
I don’t see a second if. Did you mean IF Baha’u’llah is proof of god, and that does not appear to be true?
There were two, bold and underlined 'if's in the previous statement. Yes, I do mean it appears to be false that Baha’u’llah proves god, firstly because you haven't given us any reasoning, and secondly because, if there were a valid, objective reason to think so, then you'd be contradicting your claim that there can be no objective evidence for god.
No, God could not provide objective evidence of Himself because God is not a material being that can be seen in the material world. God being omnipotent has nothing to do with this.
You're contradicting yourself again - and of course omnipotence would mean that god could do anything it wanted, so it could do anything to the physical world and provide objective evidence. That's what omnipotent
means. And it was your argument that god
could do this but
chooses not to.
It was never my argument that God does not choose to provide objective evidence of Himself. All I ever said is that God chooses not to prove He exists...
That's the same thing. To prove it exists, it would have to supply undeniable objective evidence.
...He wants us to prove He exists for ourselves.
Which is, even in principle,
impossible with no objective evidence.
Why? Because the only way humans can ever know anything about God if from a Messenger who can mediate between God and humans.
Which is god's choice, he could have made things differently, if it is actually omnipotent.
It has turned out just fine since 93% of people in the world believe in God and most of them believe because of one of the Messengers.
And most of them have got it wrong (because they believe corrupted messages, and they don't believe in multiple messengers), not to mention the fact that they've indulged in violence and oppression of each other because of their differences. Yes, great plan, who cares about those tortured to death, eh?
Please let me know when you come up with a better way and I will drop it I God’s suggestion box next time I see Him.
Easy, provide a clear, objectively verifiable message to everybody in the world.
God does know everything that has ever happened or will ever happen but what God’s foreknowledge does not cause anything to happen.
Of course it does. If you have perfect foreknowledge of the consequences of designing the world one way, then you can choose to do it that way or not (and maybe do it another way). Choosing to do it one way, in the perfect knowledge of all the consequences makes god entirely responsible for them. Omnipotent + omniscient = omni-responsible.
