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

[Muffled]

Knowing trumps mere belief.

I believe RF does not agree with you. Even when I argued that 1+1=2 was knowledge they still refused to believe that it was anything other than a belief and that goes for anything said on RF. So as far as I am concerned , if you believe addition is knowledge then my belief in God is knowledge also.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe RF does not agree with you. Even when I argued that 1+1=2 was knowledge they still refused to believe that it was anything other than a belief and that goes for anything said on RF. So as far as I am concerned , if you believe addition is knowledge then my belief in God is knowledge also.

I think that you may be confused. You made a statement that was apparently false. If it was true you should have been able to support it. Instead you posted more nonsense which only confirmed my suspicions.

 

[ratiocinator]

I believe I do and it does not mean your fantasies of what it means.

Evidence is some objective fact that backs up one hypothesis and is incompatible with others. You are not evidence for a god because your existence is compatible with any number of ideas about how humans came to exist.

 

[Muffled]

And do we believe the Bible is the literal truth? If we are going to question the truth or falsehood of reincarnation, then we should be looking to those beliefs held by some Hindus and Buddhists that support it. Where do they get the teachings from? Is there objective evidence that people have lived past lives and have returned into a different body? Or, is it just a belief of some people in those religions and has no proof?

I believe the Bible is the truth. Not all of it is literal. And not all of it is correct.

I do not believe so because those are only philosophies and contain many falsehoods about reincarnation.

I believe the most scientific work in this regard was done in "The Search for Bridey Murphy." Many people think they have memories of previous lives including me but there is no way to verify if it is a real memory or a fantasy. Only God knows that for sure which is why one has to look to the Bible for answers.

 

[Muffled]

I think that you may be confused. You made a statement that was apparently false. If it was true you should have been able to support it. Instead you posted more nonsense which only confirmed my suspicions.

I believe you are ducking the issue. Not surprising. I find atheists do this often because they do not wish to believe there is a God so they do not want to allow any discussion of evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe you are ducking the issue. Not surprising. I find atheists do this often because they do not wish to believe there is a God so they do not want to allow any discussion of evidence.

No, you ducked. You claimed to be the evidence for God.

And I sincerely doubt if you understand the concept of evidence. But go ahead. tell us how you are the evidence for God. Atheists are not afraid of evidence, they tend to embrace it.

 

[Muffled]

Evidence is some objective fact that backs up one hypothesis and is incompatible with others. You are not evidence for a god because your existence is compatible with any number of ideas about how humans came to exist.

I believe that is illogical. If there are many ideas that does not exclude a God idea; it includes it.

However I am evidence of God not because of my existence but because of God's existence in me.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe that is illogical. If there are many ideas that doe not exclude a God idea; it includes it.

Howeve I am evidence of God not because of my existence but because of God's existence in me.

There was nothing illogical about his statement and more rambling on your part also supports that your logical reasoning abilities may need some help. By the way were you serious about Bridey Murphy being "evidence" of reincarnation?

 

[ratiocinator]

I believe that is illogical. If there are many ideas that doe not exclude a God idea; it includes it.

That entirely misses the point. If I claim that things falling to the ground are evidence of invisible 'gravity' elves that pull them down, then, by your 'logic', this is correct because all the other (more sane) ideas do not rule out the elves.

Howeve I am evidence of God not because of my existence but because of God's existence in me.

So where is the evidence of this? Where is the objective fact that I can check?

 

[Trailblazer]

I believe then you do not understand the Bible because it is there.

Please cite any verses in the Bible that support a belief in reincarnation.

 

[Tiberius]

That is too vague for me to do anything with.

I have very clearly pointed out the instances where I have found you have done so. I'm not going to lsit them here.

No, I do not ignore science, I just do not need the vaccine for anything but I am not saying other people should not get it.

You literally said that the covid vaccines cause adverse health effects and death when the science actually shows they are safe to use. The risk from the vaccines is no greater than the risk of other similar medical treatments.

I really don't care what they show. I have my beliefs about prayer and that is good enough for me.
Nobody can prove that God does or doesn't answer prayers, that is illogical because nobody can ever know what God is doing at any time. However, if the studies were based upon people asking for something specific I can see why the prayers did not have an effect ebcaue God is not a short order cook.

So you DO ignore the science when it says something that goes against your beliefs.

You have your head right in the sand and you believe everything you are told about the Covid vaccines There certainly have been adverse effects and deaths from the Covid vaccines. This is well-documented. If you actually DID understand the statistics, you would not be making these mistakes. I have the statistics but I am not going to post them here since we are not supposed to talk about Covid in this forum since there is a forum just for that.

So you went to Google University and think you understand the vaccines better than the ACTUAL DOCTORS ADN SCIENTISTS who developed it.

Yeah, I'm really going to take your word over theirs.

Again you have your head in the sand. There are always other scientists with a different study. There is no universal consensus in science even if you believe there is. Scientists do not agree on everything. You worship science like a God and you don't want your bubble to be bursted.

Again, you prove my point for me. You do not understand the science.

It is a belief for which there is evidence, but not the kind of evidence you would ever accept.

You have repeatedly shown that the "evidence" you have is just you deciding to believe it. We'll add "evidence to the list of things you appear to not understand, along with "science."

No, I do not agree. God could be having an effect that humans cannot measure.

If the effect cannot be measured, then it is, as far as we are concerned, zero. You've already agreed with me on this. I said, "An effect that can't be measured and an effect that isn't there at all are the same thing." And you replied with, "Okay, that kind of makes sense."

Perhaps one day you'll surprise me and actually stick to the position you claim.

I make no claims so i have no burden, but even if I did make claims I would not have the burden of proof unless I was trying to convince people that my beliefs are true.

The instant yopu present what you believe as a true and factual statement you are making a claim.

I cannot prove it to you or to anyone else and if you knew anything about human nature you would know why.
I can only prove it to myself and if you wanted to believe you'd have to prove it to yourself.

Yeah, I've put it to my own test. And it FAILED.

Why don't they work like that? Why shouldn't God require you to investigate the truth for yourself? Why should someone else prove it to you? If someone else convinced you it would not be your belief, it would be theirs.

We know how reality works. If something is objectively true, then anyone can find it and they can demonstrate it to anyone else.

No scientist has ever said, "I have verified what the speed of light is, but I can't show you. You'll have to figure it out for yourself."

That is the method God wants you to use and there is no other method that works. You are atheists because you refuse to use follow God's instructions; instead you think you know more than God about how to search for truth. Your proposed method is a dead end road because it is designed for scientific truth, not for religious truth. Any logical person would know that the methods are different for discovering religious truth.

That's the only method that works for religion because religion is bunk and anyone who wants to "prove" it has to rely on a method that can produce a false positive. That is the ONLY reason that anyone ever claims, "That might work for science, but you can't use it for religion."

 

[Tiberius]

It's not my homework because I don't care what they said.

You don't care about the opinions of the leaders of your own faith?

I made no claims.

You presenting your beliefs as true is a claim.

I don't know and I don't care. YOU were the one who brought up this subject because YOU wanted to know so YOU are the one who should watch the video if YOU want to know.

Here is a video that probably proves that the Baha'i faith is wrong.

I don't know if the answer is in there and I don't care. If YOU want to know, then YOU are the one who needs to watch the video.

That's literally how your argument is coming across. You're posting nonsense to me as answers to what I ask you. You're just wasting my time.

 

[Trailblazer]

You seem to be confusing internal self-consistency, with a logical reason to believe something in the first place. You started by making a baseless claim: "It is because God reveals a new and different religion in every age and that religion is suited to the age and people to which the religion was revealed.", then added another two baseless claims: "Religions do not contradict each other, they are simply different from one another. The religious believers have misinterpreted the scriptures so they 'believe' that their religion is the one true religion and that is why religious people are at odds with one another.", then said: "This all makes logical sense IF you bother to think about it and you look at human behavior.". No, it only makes sense if I'm prepared to accept your baseless claims, that amount to accepting your faith.

I had a logical reason to believe in the Baha'i Faith and that is why I believed it in the first place, because it is the only religion that makes any logical sense to me.

That God reveals a new and different religion in every age and that religion is suited to the age and people to which the religion was revealed is not a claim, it is my belief. That religions do not contradict each other, they are simply different from one another, is not a baseless claim; it is a fact, but one has to use their rational mind and think in order to figure that out. The scriptures of religions do not contradict each other although they are different. However, what has become of the religions over time is contradictory since religious believers have misinterpreted and corrupted the original message of those religions over time.

You do not have to accept my religion in order to look at the older religions and see that the scriptures have been misconstrued and the original message has been corrupted, although you would have to know something about those religions and their history.

The analogy was about the morality of getting an important message to people and why it should be easy to see it and not something we should be expected to work for. Not about science and religion, or the evidence for them.

But you have not given me a logical reason why the important message in religion should be easy to see except that is the way you want it to be, whereas I have given you the reason why it is not that easy to see, because God wants it that way. Logically speaking, if God wants us to make an effort rather than making it easy there is nothing you can do about that since you cannot control an omnipotent God. If you want to reject my beliefs in favor of your own personal opinions fine, as long as you don't care about God or the message that has been delivered.

Why isn't it something we should work for? Give me one good reason. We work for everything else we get in this life, so why should the message from God be something we do not have to work for?

I'm not going to go on repeating myself, it's pointless. I've addressed this countless times.

I fully agree.

Free will, in that sense, is incoherent. We either do things entirely for preceding reasons, or we don't. If we don't, some part of our choice-making must be random. Think about rewinding time to a point at which you made a choice and ask yourself if you could have done differently. If your answer is 'no' then we would be deterministic and your sort of 'free will' doesn't exist. If your answer is 'yes', then, since absolutely everything is the exactly same (including all the contents of your mind), then any difference can't be for any reason (all the possible reasons are the same), so it must be for no reason. Something that happens for no reason must be random. Randomness can't give us freedom and we can't be held responsible for it, so your sort of 'free will' still doesn't exist.

Of course we make choices based upon previous experiences but that does not mean that we do not have free will to make choices. Just because you made choice a that does not mean you could not have made choice b; it only means you made choice a instead. Of course there is no way to turn back the clock and prove you could have or could not have done something differently. The only reason that you might have been unable to do something differently is if the choice you made was predestined by God, but I do not believe all our choices are predestined by God, although some are.

Are you really unaware that when you make a choice you are making a choice? Haven't you ever had two options available to you and you chose one of them instead of the other one, like stay home and work or go out with friends? Unless I am very emotionally distraught, I am self-aware and I know I am choosing and I know why I choose one thing over another, even though the thought come to me in a split second. Exactly what causes me to choose one thing over another is not something I can always know, although sometimes I am aware of why I choose a instead of b. For example, when I go grocery shopping I can choose to ask my husband to come with me or not ask him. I am usually aware that he does not want to go out so I don't want to bother him so I usually don't ask him to come with me and I go alone. That is based upon past experience of knowing he does not want to go with me, but I still have a choice to ask him or not ask him.

Free will is simply the will/ability to make choices based upon our desires and preferences. Our desires and preferences come from a combination of factors such as childhood upbringing, heredity, education, adult experiences, and present life circumstances. How free they are varies with the situation. Certainly what we refer to as “free will” has many constraints such as capability and opportunity. However, we can make choices as otherwise, we would just be like pre-programmed robots. For example, people choose to get married, go to college, or have children, since nobody chooses for them.

I've addressed this countless times, too.

No you never told me 'another way' in which God could provide evidence of His existence and you never told me another way, aside from Messengers, in which could God communicate the actual messages that we see in scriptures of religions.

 

[Trailblazer]

You literally said that the covid vaccines cause adverse health effects and death when the science actually shows they are safe to use. The risk from the vaccines is no greater than the risk of other similar medical treatments.

Just because other medical treatments also carry risks does not mean I want the risks of Covid vaccines and I am certainly not the only one who feels this way.

So you DO ignore the science when it says something that goes against your beliefs.

That is not science.

So you went to Google University and think you understand the vaccines better than the ACTUAL DOCTORS AND SCIENTISTS who developed it.

Yeah, I'm really going to take your word over theirs.

No I looked at the VAERS data.

How do you know any more than me, you are no scientist. You just take their word for it.
I do not claim to understand the vaccines and I don't put things into my body that I do not understand just because someone tells me it is "safe and effective" like a mantra.

Again, you prove my point for me. You do not understand the science.

That is meaningless vaguery, understand the science. You understand everything and I don't understand anything. What is that called? I know but you probably don't.

You have repeatedly shown that the "evidence" you have is just you deciding to believe it. We'll add "evidence to the list of things you appear to not understand, along with "science."

Of course I decided to believe it but that does not mean it was not evidence. take a course in logic.

The instant you present what you believe as a true and factual statement you are making a claim.

I claimed nothing.

Yeah, I've put it to my own test. And it FAILED.

You did not do anything at all and you know it. You never even researches the Baha'i Faith so how could you put it to any test?

We know how reality works. If something is objectively true, then anyone can find it and they can demonstrate it to anyone else.

No scientist has ever said, "I have verified what the speed of light is, but I can't show you. You'll have to figure it out for yourself."

Conflating science and religion again and committing the fallacy of false equivalence.

That's the only method that works for religion because religion is bunk and anyone who wants to "prove" it has to rely on a method that can produce a false positive. That is the ONLY reason that anyone ever claims, "That might work for science, but you can't use it for religion."

No, the only reason anyone says that is because it is logic 101.
Conflating science and religion as if one can use the same method to prove them true is completely illogical.
But on on ahead, I don't care what you believe or disbelieve.

 

[Trailblazer]

You don't care about the opinions of the leaders of your own faith?

Not on that subject.

You presenting your beliefs as true is a claim.

Saying "I believe" is not a claim.

Here is a video that probably proves that the Baha'i faith is wrong.

Do you enjoy making a fool out of yourself?

You will never know if the Baha'i Faith is wrong because you never investigated it for yourself.
People who want to know if something is true investigate it for themselves, they don't expect other people to prove it to them.

I don't know if the answer is in there and I don't care. If YOU want to know, then YOU are the one who needs to watch the video.

That's literally how your argument is coming across. You're posting nonsense to me as answers to what I ask you. You're just wasting my time.

I have no argument since I am not trying to prove anything.

You are not my boss at work. This is just a forum. I am not obligated to answer any questions you ask me.

Please don't waste any more of your time or my time. For you it is all "I am right and you are wrong" -- about everything.
It is not a conversation when one person has to be right about everything.

 

[ratiocinator]

That God reveals a new and different religion in every age and that religion is suited to the age and people to which the religion was revealed is not a claim, it is my belief.

If you state a belief without backing it up with some reasoning or evidence, and then use it in what you claim is a logical argument, it's a baseless claim.

That religions do not contradict each other, they are simply different from one another, is not a baseless claim; it is a fact, but one has to use their rational mind and think in order to figure that out.

Where is the reasoning?

The scriptures of religions do not contradict each other although they are different.

Yes they do. The bible even contradicts itself.

But you have not given me a logical reason why the important message in religion should be easy to see except that is the way you want it to be, whereas I have given you the reason why it is not that easy to see, because God wants it that way.

Please stop misrepresenting me. I have never once said that it should be easy because I want it to be. Neither have I ever disputed that, if some god exits that has a message, it obviously doesn't want its message to be easy to find. I've just pointed out that that makes said god evil.

Why isn't it something we should work for? Give me one good reason.

I've explained multiple times. You don't hide important messages that are about people's well-being.

Of course we make choices based upon previous experiences but that does not mean that we do not have free will to make choices. Just because you made choice a that does not mean you could not have made choice b; it only means you made choice a instead. Of course there is no way to turn back the clock and prove you could have or could not have done something differently.

Of course you can't rewind time, it was a thought experiment that shows that 'free will' is an illusion, except in the compatibilist sense, which could not be free from a creator god.

 

[an anarchist]

What the OP intended to create

What the OP actually created

 

[CG Didymus]

I believe the Bible is the truth. Not all of it is literal. And not all of it is correct.

I do not believe so because those are only philosophies and contain many falsehoods about reincarnation.

I believe the most scientific work in this regard was done in "The Search for Bridey Murphy." Many people think they have memories of previous lives including me but there is no way to verify if it is a real memory or a fantasy. Only God knows that for sure which is why one has to look to the Bible for answers.

Well, the response is to a Baha'i. They agree with you. They believe the Bible is truth but that not all of it is literal... or a lot of it. And, that it is not all correct. Funny, though, what is truth and what is correct is what they tell you is true and correct. A big thing that is not literal for them is the resurrection of Jesus.

And, Baha'is do believe in Hinduism and Buddhism, but they don't believe in reincarnation. So Baha'is have a non-literal interpretation about any verse that suggests that reincarnation is true.

I, personally, like the idea of a soul or spirit, which ever it is, coming back and experiencing life in a different body in a different situation.

 

[CG Didymus]

We know how reality works. If something is objectively true, then anyone can find it and they can demonstrate it to anyone else.

Until recent times people were born into or forced to believe in a religion. And not one of those earlier religions do Baha'is believe in as having the absolute truth about God. As seen below, Baha'is believe all of them have been corrupted. So the smart thing to do is to not believe in what we are told is true by those other religions. So how do we test a new religion like the Baha'i Faith that claims is has the pure, unadulterated truth from God? We ask for proof. We ask for evidence. Because he was a nice guy and seems trustworthy, and because he said God is real, is not proof. But to "prove" it to oneself? That's different.

I had a logical reason to believe in the Baha'i Faith and that is why I believed it in the first place, because it is the only religion that makes any logical sense to me.

So you used logic? The Baha'i Faith makes "logical" sense? That's something we can all look at and see for ourselves. Does it make logical sense that an all-loving God has made all this mess? Sure, if you think that earthquakes, storms, diseases, and animals that hurt or kill humans was a good, loving way to create a world.

Sure, if you think God sent several messages through various manifestations to different small groups of people, and let them write that message down, and get it wrong, and to later misinterpret it.

Sure, if you think what seems like just random things happening to people, like some die young, some die of horrible diseases, some get killed by other people, some live their whole lives as slaves to an unjust system.

But now, it's going to be different? People are still dying young, dying of horrible diseases, getting killed by other people, dying by floods and earthquakes and hurricanes and such. How has the Baha'i Faith changed things? How will it change things and make things better? And if people do start loving and caring about one another, will there still be people dying young, dying of horrible diseases and natural disasters? Then those "bad" things are part of God's plan. That's how God designed it. It is almost like he's not there and doesn't care.

That God reveals a new and different religion in every age and that religion is suited to the age and people to which the religion was revealed is not a claim, it is my belief. That religions do not contradict each other, they are simply different from one another, is not a baseless claim; it is a fact, but one has to use their rational mind and think in order to figure that out. The scriptures of religions do not contradict each other although they are different. However, what has become of the religions over time is contradictory since religious believers have misinterpreted and corrupted the original message of those religions over time.

Baha'is only recognized the "revealed", major religions, which do seem to contradict each other. But you say it is a "fact" that they don't? What are those "facts"?

The Scriptures of each religion do contradict each other. Some Scriptures contradict themselves. But Baha'is, you, have said that people wrote them and people got some of the things wrong. And then "corrupted" the "original" message? So we don't even have the "original" message that, because it was written by people, was probably wrong anyway. But that "corrupted" message is where there are contradictions? But that's all we've got. There are no non-contradictory "original" messages.

But that's a way to explain away the religions of the past and to still pretend that you believe in them and think that they all came from God. Fine, they were right but now are wrong, and, besides that, they are all in the past and irrelevant, because now we have an uncorrupted, new message from God. Great, and how do we know that? Because Baha'u'llah was a nice guy and had no reason to lie. And, he fulfilled some mission? But, most of all, to me, he wrote a bunch of stuff. And those writings we have and can all look at and see if they make logical sense and sound true?

People are one? Sounds good. But then God is one? But some religions have multiple Gods and different definitions of God? And, Baha'is say God is unknowable, so we can't prove God exists... We have to take Baha'u'llah's word for it? So again, we have to come to believe him and his claims. Do they all make logical sense?

You do not have to accept my religion in order to look at the older religions and see that the scriptures have been misconstrued and the original message has been corrupted, although you would have to know something about those religions and their history.

Again, what was the "original" message? And, you are right... to know that they been "misconstrued" you'd have to know something about those religions and their history. Great, we can do that. Let's look at Hinduism and Buddhism. What do they say? What is their history? What prophecies do they have about the coming of Kalki and Maitreya? And, what does Baha'u'llah, or the Baha'i Faith, say about them? You want to do that? Considering in the past you've said things like "I don't care", I don't think you really do.

So all we have is Baha'is believe in all the other major religions and their Scriptures. But believe all of them have had people write down the message, so it was probably messed up anyway, but then they have lost the "original" message, and have added things in and misinterpret this new "corrupted" message. And, even though, the Quran is more accurate, I suppose Baha'is have a problem with what happened to Islam also?

So it all comes down to Baha'u'llah and what he wrote. That's the only true message from God we can be sure of? Because it make logical sense? So because it makes logical sense, and in those writings Baha'u'llah says there is a God, therefore, God is real and Baha'u'llah is his manifestation for today. And how is that different than saying, "I believe in God, because Baha'u'llah said so"? And that's your "proof"? If that's all you got, just say so. Why go through all this grief you've put yourself through?

 

[CG Didymus]

You will never know if the Baha'i Faith is wrong because you never investigated it for yourself.
People who want to know if something is true investigate it for themselves, they don't expect other people to prove it to them.

You are the Baha'i. You say that Baha'u'llah's claims are true. You keep putting out that quote that says that his life, his mission and his writings are the proof. Okay, what about his life, his mission and in his writings prove anything?

Sure, at some point the other person has to do some reading and research, but the Baha'i teachers job is to plant a seed and water it a little bit. You've put yourself into the position, whether you like it or not, of being the Baha'i teacher. What is your best strategy to get people to care enough about the truth of the Baha'i Faith to actually read some of what the Baha'i Faith believes?

But, if you don't want to be a Baha'i teacher, and to be responsible for planting those seeds of faith in others, and to help guide them on the path of learning and understanding the truth of the Baha'i Faith, you're doing a good job.

If you state a belief without backing it up with some reasoning or evidence, and then use it in what you claim is a logical argument, it's a baseless claim.

This TB, is what so many of us have to say about what you are doing. Thread after thread... is it them or you? What is the next step in actually opening up people's minds to the possibility that the Baha'i Faith is true? If it is logical and sensible? What are the things that makes the Baha'i Faith logical and sensible? You're never going to "prove" God or Baha'u'llah. All you can hope to do is not turn people off from wanting to investigate and look into what the Baha'i Faith teaches. Or not.