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

[CG Didymus]

Different Baha'i have different points of view, and different emphasis. We are free to have our own opinions and own points of view.

As you might remember, I was around Baha'is when the "Dialogue" magazine problem happened. So I know that Baha'is can't just say and do as they please. Which, I can see why. Can't have people saying just anything. It makes it hard to know if that is what all Baha'is believe or if that is just a personal opinion of a person who is a Baha'i.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yes, like trust and obey God or he will strike you dead? Or, believe in Jesus or God will send you to hell? The spiritual guidance is do good, or an invisible God is going to punish you.

It is all up to you CG. How you see it all can only be balanced in your own thoughts.

God will take us from this life as God so chooses, I am thankful for the chance to know and Love God, amongst all the turmoil of this world.

I see Hell is our remoteness from God, we send ourselves to that stage of being, we are addicted to this material world, we find hard to let it go, we punish our own selves in the process.

Submission to God's Will for us is the ultimate peace, it does not mean life will get any easier, it just has meaning.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

The scientific method is the best tool we have for finding out how reality actually works. Steps of the Scientific Method.

That’s true, if you are referring to the physical world.

And the exact same thing can be said about choosing shoes.

We are going to choose a new pair of shoes according to our desires and preferences that come from a combination of factors such as childhood upbringing, heredity, education, adult experiences, and life circumstances.

So you're still contradicting yourself.

No, all those factors do not weigh in when one buys a new pair of shoes that they desire. Buying shoes is not an intellectual decision, it is visual and emotional. However, all those factors do weigh in when we pick a new religion we desire because it is an intellectual decision, at least it should be, and it is a life-changing decision so ther are many things to consider. By contrast, what pair of shoes we buy is rather trivial.

My point was that one is not going to join a religion that they do not like, they are going to choose the religion they prefer, but that does not mean that a person has to choose a religion for the wrong reasons such as getting their emotional needs met. A person should chose a religion because they believe it is the truth, but join only after they determine that by doing a thorough investigation of the religion.

Okay then. Please tell us a way to objectively test the Baha'i faith.

The test is not one for me to select since I am not the one who wants to test the religion.

 

[CG Didymus]

Except I do not see the Baha'i God doing that. What drives me nuts about this debate is that she is trying to defend Baha'i based upon its weakest points. It shows a bit of fundamentalist fervor.

Baha'i seems to have superior morals to Christianity to me. That is what the defense should be based upon. Not trying to almost deify the founder of Baha'i.

The Baha'i Faith is more similar to Judaism and Islam than Christianity, because it has a whole bunch of rules. I was in my early twenties when I was going to Baha'i gatherings, and morals was still a problem. I had no problem, I wasn't going to say "no" to some cute Baha'i girl. For me, that's a problem that a religion with a lot of rules is going to always have... the people are going to break them. And the moral rules about sex are going to be the first ones to be broken.

I had Christian friends, this was during the "Jesus Freak" movement in the 70's, and I had Baha'i friends... all of them were "fooling" around. And I think that is a great weakness in both those religions, 'cause the people are going to be living double lives, so holy and pure when at their meetings, but then "runnin" with the devil when they're on their own.

My Christian friends took it harder, though. They were so filled with guilt. I think because they believe they let the devil get control of them. A few of them finally gave up and the next time I saw them, they were selling drugs, drinking and living with their girl friends. In some ways I like them better that way, because, at least, now they weren't telling me how sinful I was and that I needed to give my heart to Jesus.

Now my Baha'i friends were very liberal minded. Casual sex wasn't "evil" or "sinful" to them, but it was against the rules of the Baha'i Faith. I liked being around them, but I also saw another side of the Baha'i Faith... a more conservative and authoritarian side. If the Baha'i Faith ever gets big enough, I think those people are going to be a problem.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Baha'i Faith is more similar to Judaism and Islam than Christianity, because it has a whole bunch of rules. I was in my early twenties when I was going to Baha'i gatherings, and morals was still a problem. I had no problem, I wasn't going to say "no" to some cute Baha'i girl. For me, that's a problem that a religion with a lot of rules is going to always have... the people are going to break them. And the moral rules about sex are going to be the first ones to be broken.

I had Christian friends, this was during the "Jesus Freak" movement in the 70's, and I had Baha'i friends... all of them were "fooling" around. And I think that is a great weakness in both those religions, 'cause the people are going to be living double lives, so holy and pure when at their meetings, but then "runnin" with the devil when they're on their own.

My Christian friends took it harder, though. They were so filled with guilt. I think because they believe they let the devil get control of them. A few of them finally gave up and the next time I saw them, they were selling drugs, drinking and living with their girl friends. In some ways I like them better that way, because, at least, now they weren't telling me how sinful I was and that I needed to give my heart to Jesus.

Now my Baha'i friends were very liberal minded. Casual sex wasn't "evil" or "sinful" to them, but it was against the rules of the Baha'i Faith. I liked being around them, but I also saw another side of the Baha'i Faith... a more conservative and authoritarian side. If the Baha'i Faith ever gets big enough, I think those people are going to be a problem.

Too bad Pastafaraianism was not around then.

 

[CG Didymus]

It is all up to you CG. How you see it all can only be balanced in your own thoughts.

God will take us from this life as God so chooses, I am thankful for the chance to know and Love God, amongst all the turmoil of this world.

I see Hell is our remoteness from God, we send ourselves to that stage of being, we are addicted to this material world, we find hard to let it go, we punish our own selves in the process.

Submission to God's Will for us is the ultimate peace, it does not mean life will get any easier, it just has meaning.

Regards Tony

Yes, now you see it as remoteness from God, but tell that to people that were forced into believe the Satan and demons and hell fire were all true. Those strict forms of Christian belief was all they knew. That Christianity is what helped push people away from God and become atheists. Atheists shouldn't be treated as the enemies of the Baha'i Faith, but by trying to "prove" that God is real is making them into your enemies.

 

[CG Didymus]

Too bad Pastafaraianism was not around then.

Tell me about this religion? Who was there prophet? And did he make claims or just had beliefs?

 

[Trailblazer]

Because you have the question backwards.

You may understand your reasoning, but it does not qualify as "logic".

As usual you are not direct in what you say so I cannot respond. You just say I am not logical.

My reasoning is logical unless you can prove otherwise. Just saying it does not prove it.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, Jewish stories tellers passing on the legends and myths of their people. I think they were real people.

And is what Baha'u'llah writes about the stories of Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses consistent with the Biblical versions? No. Then on some thread some Baha'i was talking about there being two David's? What's that all about?

Well, as you well know, all these inconsistencies bother me. It's too easy for Baha'u'llah to make up an alternative "truth" and version of Bible stories and characters, and there is no way to prove him wrong... so therefore he must be right? Because he's a manifestation of God and knows what is right?

But, you know what, that's been done before. The Baha'i Faith isn't the first. Christianity took the Hebrew Bible and made a few changes and interpretations and "proved" the Jesus was not only the Messiah but as God. Then Islam did it to Christianity. But then the Baha'i Faith does it to all the other major religions. And does the same thing. It makes a few changes and some new interpretations, and, to Baha'is, clearly shows how all of those other religion were a progression leading up to Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith. Just like God, Baha'is can believe that, but they can't prove it.

As Tony said, we have already covered all that before and the Bible is now history, since we now have a new Revelation from God through Baha'u'llah.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As usual you are not direct in what you say so I cannot respond. You just say I am not logical.

My reasoning is logical unless you can prove otherwise. Just saying it does not prove it.

That is because when you made the errors you ignored the corrections. You can ask people to correct you in the future, but at this point you have lost the ability to demand that people show where you have failed.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is because when you made the errors you ignored the corrections. You can ask people to correct you in the future, but at this point you have lost the ability to demand that people show where you have failed.

Nobody corrected any errors I made. They just believe they did. It is really rather pathetic.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nobody corrected any errors I made. They just believe they did. It is really rather pathetic.

Oh my. Everyone is wrong except for you

 

[Trailblazer]

Oh my. Everyone is wrong except for you

Oh my. Everyone is right except for me.

If many atheists believe x about Tb it must be true... What's that fallacy called?

Argumentum ad populum

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

 

[Tiberius]

Science does not know how the universe was created, science only has some theories. True, religion and science differ regarding creation of the universe, but it is not really a contradiction because science has not proven anything about how the universe was created and religion has not proven anything either. Science has theories and religion has beliefs and obviously they are different.

Irrelevant. Science and religion both present different explanations. Since both explanations can not be true, they are contradictory.

I’ll grant you there is some overlap there.

So now you are agreeing that there is overlap, and there cannot be overlap on two mutually exclusive claims. Thus, there is a contradiction (which you said did not exist).

No, but I just don’t like the constant haranguing – you did this, you did that – because it causes disharmony and it required that a person defend themselves.

Then do not use logical fallacies.

Because we cannot measure spiritual reality with science and we cannot measure physical reality with religion. Thus both religion and science are necessary for humans to survive, thrive and progress.

But since there is no way for anyone to verify another's experiences of this alleged "spiritual reality," there is no way to show that it actually exists.

The world changes over time so why wouldn’t our needs change? Do you really think that humanity has the same needs it had back in the biblical times? This is a new age, the age of science and technology and our physical needs are very different. Our spiritual needs are the same but we have to live life in the material world. Social, economic, and political systems have changed and the environment and physical landscape is very different than it was back in the biblical times. Ever heard of climate change?

You clearly said that, according to Baha'i, our needs would NOT change.

“No man, however acute his perception, can ever hope to reach the heights which the wisdom and understanding of the Divine Physician have attained. Little wonder, then, if the treatment prescribed by the physician in this day should not be found to be identical with that which he prescribed before. How could it be otherwise when the ills affecting the sufferer necessitate at every stage of his sickness a special remedy?”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 80

What we need does NOT change. What we need today is IDENTICAL to what we needed in the past. You've quoted that several times.

 

[Tiberius]

Other possible explanations for what?

It’s true that science can show that there are not other possible explanations for physical things, but science has no explanations for spiritual things.

Of course, you are assuming that spiritual things actually exist.

 

[Tiberius]

Baha’u’llah knew everything that was coming and put in place what will be necessary for humans to deal with it when the time comes. Baha’u’llah made provisions for the Universal House of Justice (UHJ) who can legislate on matters that are not expressly revealed in His Writings, so if advances in science start to impinge upon human moral behavior the UHJ can legislate on those.

Except you've already failed on that account. I've asked you to provide the Baha'i position on genetic modification, and you've said that there is nothing in Baha'i faith that address the morality of this.

 

[Tiberius]

That’s true, if you are referring to the physical world.

You have not shown there is any spiritual world.

No, all those factors do not weigh in when one buys a new pair of shoes that they desire. Buying shoes is not an intellectual decision, it is visual and emotional. However, all those factors do weigh in when we pick a new religion we desire because it is an intellectual decision, at least it should be, and it is a life-changing decision so ther are many things to consider. By contrast, what pair of shoes we buy is rather trivial.

You are contradicting yourself.

You said, "we are going to choose a religion according to our desires and preferences that come from a combination of factors such as childhood upbringing, heredity, education, adult experiences, and life circumstances."

When I said we buy shoes for the same exact reasons, you dismissed it as "visual and emotional," not "intellectual."

And yet the same reasons do count as intellectual after all when it comes to religion.

My point was that one is not going to join a religion that they do not like, they are going to choose the religion they prefer, but that does not mean that a person has to choose a religion for the wrong reasons such as getting their emotional needs met. A person should chose a religion because they believe it is the truth, but join only after they determine that by doing a thorough investigation of the religion.

An investigation that, being unable to be checked by anyone else, is nothing more than subjective opinion.

The test is not one for me to select since I am not the one who wants to test the religion.

You DON'T want to test the religion? Isn't that what the investigation was for? To make sure it was actually correct?

 

[Trailblazer]

Irrelevant. Science and religion both present different explanations. Since both explanations can not be true, they are contradictory.

I will concede to that because it is logical. I was a little muddled earlier because I had been working all day and it was late.

So now you are agreeing that there is overlap, and there cannot be overlap on two mutually exclusive claims. Thus, there is a contradiction (which you said did not exist).

No, if you are referring to creation there is no overlap, science and religion are mutually exclusive.

Then do not use logical fallacies.

You have not demonstrated how I used any. If you want to play this game you can expect me to point out your logical fallacies.

But since there is no way for anyone to verify another's experiences of this alleged "spiritual reality," there is no way to show that it actually exists.

But do you understand that something can exist even if it cannot be shown to exist?

You clearly said that, according to Baha'i, our needs would NOT change.

“No man, however acute his perception, can ever hope to reach the heights which the wisdom and understanding of the Divine Physician have attained. Little wonder, then, if the treatment prescribed by the physician in this day should not be found to be identical with that which he prescribed before. How could it be otherwise when the ills affecting the sufferer necessitate at every stage of his sickness a special remedy?”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 80

What we need does NOT change. What we need today is IDENTICAL to what we needed in the past. You've quoted that several times.

I never said that. I guess you do not understand what that passage above means. It is saying that the treatment prescribed by God for this age will not be identical with the treatment that was prescribed in a former age. For example, what Baha’u’llah prescribed for humanity in this age is not identical to what Jesus had prescribed 2000 years ago. How could that be the case when the illness humanity suffers from in this age is different from the illness that humanity suffered from in the days of Jesus?

Let’s say you went to the doctor 20 years ago and the doctor prescribed a medicine and you recovered from the illness. Today you have a different illness and you go to the doctor. Is the doctor going to prescribe the same medicine he prescribed for you 20 years ago? No, the doctor will give you a different medicine because you have a different illness..

“No man, however acute his perception, can ever hope to reach the heights which the wisdom and understanding of the Divine Physician have attained. Little wonder, then, if the treatment prescribed by the physician in this day should not be found to be identical with that which he prescribed before. How could it be otherwise when the ills affecting the sufferer necessitate at every stage of his sickness a special remedy? In like manner, every time the Prophets of God have illumined the world with the resplendent radiance of the Day Star of Divine knowledge, they have invariably summoned its peoples to embrace the light of God through such means as best befitted the exigencies of the age in which they appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 80

 

[Trailblazer]

Of course, you are assuming that spiritual things actually exist.

No I do not assume that they exist, I believe that they exist.

 

[Trailblazer]

Except you've already failed on that account. I've asked you to provide the Baha'i position on genetic modification, and you've said that there is nothing in Baha'i faith that address the morality of this.

Why should there be something in the Baha'i Faith that addresses that specifically? A religion cannot specifically address every possible contingency. People can think for themselves and make the correct moral decisions based upon the Writings of Baha'u'llah, and the institutions of the Bahai Faith also offer guidance for individuals.