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

[samtonga43]

No, the evidence is NOT the claims of Baha'u'llah, because that would be circular reasoning; i.e., I am a Messenger of God because I said I am a Messenger of God." That is ludicrous, because anyone can SAY they are a Messenger of God but that is not evidence of any kind.

Agreed 100%!

I have said this numerous times so I have to wonder why you still do not understand it.

I’m very slow.

Some time ago when asked for evidence I posted the claims of Baha’u’llah and the evidence that supports the claims of Baha’u’llah on this thread:
Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world......."
The logical conclusion must be that MrB. is God.

However, that does not mean I was not guided by God. I was either guided or not, and it has nothing to do with whether other people were also guided. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't.

I did not say that you were not guided by God (See, I can do it too.) To be guided by God is surely the basis of all faiths.

 

[Trailblazer]

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world......."
The logical conclusion must be that MrB. is God.

No, that is not the logical conclusion at all. The logical conclusion from reading that excerpt for a longer passage is that that all the Manifestations of God manifest God's attributes, and ONLY in that sense can they be considered God. The passage says "any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God" so if Baha'u'llah was God they would all be God. How would that be possible unless there is more than one God?

To pick only the beginning of that passage and omit the rest is reading it out of context. Below is the full quote:

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world....... And were any of them to voice the utterance, “I am the Messenger of God,” He, also, speaketh the truth, the indubitable truth ..........For they are all but one person, one soul, one spirit, one being, one revelation. They are all the manifestation of the “Beginning” and the “End,” the “First” and the “Last,” the “Seen” and the “Hidden”—all of which pertain to Him Who is the Innermost Spirit of Spirits and Eternal Essence of Essences. And were they to say, “We are the Servants of God,” this also is a manifest and indisputable fact. For they have been made manifest in the uttermost state of servitude, a servitude the like of which no man can possibly attain. Thus in moments in which these Essences of Being were deep immersed beneath the oceans of ancient and everlasting holiness, or when they soared to the loftiest summits of Divine mysteries, they claimed their utterances to be the Voice of Divinity, the Call of God Himself.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 54-55

`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Of course, we also have the following passage whee Baha'ullah disclaimed being God:

“Certain ones among you have said: “He it is Who hath laid claim to be God.” By God! This is a gross calumny. I am but a servant of God Who hath believed in Him and in His signs, and in His Prophets and in His angels. My tongue, and My heart, and My inner and My outer being testify that there is no God but Him, that all others have been created by His behest, and been fashioned through the operation of His Will. There is none other God but Him, the Creator, the Raiser from the dead, the Quickener, the Slayer. I am He that telleth abroad the favors with which God hath, through His bounty, favored Me.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 228

I did not say that you were not guided by God (See, I can do it too.) To be guided by God is surely the basis of all faiths.

That's true, but that does not mean that every individual in every faith is guided by God.

P.S. Your posts are linking back to that other thread again, I have no idea why.

 

[night912]

It is evidence *for me* but it is not proof. There is no proof that anyone was ever a Messenger of God and there never will be, for obvious logical reasons. How could a man ever *prove* that a God that cannot ever be *proven* to exist spoke to him? That is logically impossible.

Why are you talking about proof when I never said anything about it? I'm talking about evidence to support a person claiming to be a messenger of God. The criteria that you provided does not logically lead to God, therefore it's illogical due to it being invalid.

So we either accept his claim based upon what he offered as evidence to support his claim or we walk away. It's a choice.

The problem with having that epistemology is that all you're doing is picking and choosing which claim you want and/or which person you want to be a messenger. There's no way to tell the difference between two people both claiming to be a true messenger of God.

And on top of that, it's circular. So to take such circular reasoning like that and accept it as being true would be irrational. It's exactly the same as if a Christian was to say, "it's true that the bible is the word of God because the bible says that it's the word of God."

So we either accept his claim based upon what he offered as evidence to support his claim or we walk away. It's a choice.

Sure, but then you cannot claim that it's logical.

 

[PruePhillip]

I don't know why you call the historical views on a combination of Judaism with Hellenism and Persian myths bleak? This is standard scholarship.

'standard scholarship.'
There's lots of problems with 'standard scholarship', particularly what's taught in universties.
And what is not taught.
You are never going to get an Egyptian archaelogist find evidence of Hebew occupation in
Egypt. And no 'scholar' is going to believe that God spoke to David.
But true science isn't about believing this or that, but in .'what the data says.' And if some
scientist says, 'There's no evidence for Abraham' then it's important that the AUDIENCE to
this statement UNDERSTANDS the scientist isn't saying 'There was no Abraham' but that
there is no evidence, yet, for Abraham.

The Jews were in captivity in Egypt. No big deal - Jews are Hykos people and so many of
them migrated to Egypt they took over the nation for a while. Indeed, the Pharoah of Joseph
was likely a Hyksos himself. And the Hebrews migrated back to 'Palestine' about the the time
of the Bronze Age Collapse - only Egypt barely survived this period when the great empires
were overthrown by immigrants. Probably the Phillistines and Hebrews arrived same time.

 

[night912]

Sure, but the chances get fantastic.
I had a ten minute nap and experience a vivid dream of being on a snow sled, I cracked the
whip and yelled 'Mush'!! The dogs excitedly took off. But then the ice broke and dogs were
lost. I looked around and friends were watching me. No noise. We were waiting for the dogs
to reappear in the black water, but they didn't.

Never have had a vivid dream in a short nap like that.

Immediately after this:
Took my dog for a walk and another dog bit its back, breaking its spine. The vet said not to
call him for a week as he cared for the dog. Everyone was asking, but I could say nothing. I
new saw that dog again.

If I had thousands such dreams and I remembered just one of them which coincided with this
sad experience then fine - I was a science teacher. I read one to two hours of science every
day since I could read. But sometimes.....

But what happened to your dog wasn't the same as what happened in your dream.

911
Never found this after seeing it. A clairvoyant in 1999 on TV said he 'saw' something happening
in New York, something about a plane, and buildings burning, September. That was amazing.
Just because a lot are fakes or delusions doesn't mean all are fake and delusions. Weird stuff
happens.

Easy explanation. That person read or saw that happening on the news. Earlier that year, there were two plane crashes. The first plane crashed near NY and the second crashed in New Jersey. The one in New Jersey crashed into a tree and fell onto a house, which caught on fire.

I was in America 1999. I was obsessessed with terrorism. Even flying over I kept wondering
what if someone put a bomb on the plane? I couldn't get it out of my head at the twin towers
(but put that down to the basement bombing earlier) and thought about it when I was the
last in the statue of liberty one day. I am not usually like this. But that trip haunted me for some
reason. The whole country felt open to attack.

And during that time, terrorism was on a high alert compared to a few years prior to that.

 

[night912]

'standard scholarship.'
There's lots of problems with 'standard scholarship', particularly what's taught in universties.
And what is not taught.
You are never going to get an Egyptian archaelogist find evidence of Hebew occupation in
Egypt. And no 'scholar' is going to believe that God spoke to David.
But true science isn't about believing this or that, but in .'what the data says.' And if some
scientist says, 'There's no evidence for Abraham' then it's important that the AUDIENCE to
this statement UNDERSTANDS the scientist isn't saying 'There was no Abraham' but that
there is no evidence, yet, for Abraham.

The Jews were in captivity in Egypt. No big deal - Jews are Hykos people and so many of
them migrated to Egypt they took over the nation for a while. Indeed, the Pharoah of Joseph
was likely a Hyksos himself. And the Hebrews migrated back to 'Palestine' about the the time
of the Bronze Age Collapse - only Egypt barely survived this period when the great empires
were overthrown by immigrants. Probably the Phillistines and Hebrews arrived same time.

Sorry, but the Jews/Hebrews/Israelites are not the same as Hyksos. That's equivalent to saying that the Mongols invaded the Roman Empire then using the evidence of the invasion of the Huns as evidence for the Mongols.

 

[paarsurrey]

And you believe he was a messenger because he said he was?

Bahaullah did not claim publicly, I understand, in the Iqan or in the pre-Iqan period that:

1. Bahaullah received any direct Converse from God/Allah/YHVH
2. that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger by God/Allah/YHVH
3. Bahaullah, I understand, took the Covenant from others but he himself did not.

One may check it from Iqan.
Regards

 

[David Weaver]

Hello, I'm new to online forums. I chose this one specifically because I think it is very thought provoking. I love understanding and questioning different religious beliefs. I hope to have a debate that is robust, intriguing, and intellectually honest. I'm happy to debate anyone from any religious discipline and educational background. I currently do not have anyone to debate. I'll edit my title post, if possible, once the affirmative position has been occupied. Thanks in advance to anyone who will agree to debate. I'm ready to be convinced. Are you?

I am relatively new to the world of apologetics, but I would love the opportunity to debate someone with your educational background. I've been working on connecting the dots between science and religion and if you're willing to converse with me I would relish the opportunity to strengthen any areas I'm weak in

 

[Trailblazer]

Bahaullah did not claim publicly, I understand, in the Iqan or in the pre-Iqan period that:

1. Bahaullah received any direct Converse from God/Allah/YHVH
2. that Bahaullah was appointed a Messenger by God/Allah/YHVH
3. Bahaullah, I understand, took the Covenant from others but he himself did not.

One may check it from Iqan.
Regards

1. Baha'u'llah did claim direct Converse from God.
2. Baha'u'llah did claim that He was appointed as a Messenger by God.
3. Baha'u'llah made a Covenant with His followers: Bahá’u’lláh and His Covenant

 

[PruePhillip]

Sorry, but the Jews/Hebrews/Israelites are not the same as Hyksos. That's equivalent to saying that the Mongols invaded the Roman Empire then using the evidence of the invasion of the Huns as evidence for the Mongols.

Yes, the Hyksos were Semitic, same as Jews and Arabs,
interestingly we now know (as of this month) that Jews are
'Levantine' people and Arabs are 'African' people by origin.
So Jews, like Philistines, Turks etc have a strong European
element to their genes. And Arabs from the Arabian Penninsula
have a strong African genetic base.
That's interesting from the current Jew/\Palestinian troubles.

The Hyksos infiltrated Egypt peacefully - just as the Hebrews
did. And the Jews emmigrated from Egypt at the time of the
Bronze Age Collapse - probably. Egypt was left severely and
permanently weakened by the mass migration of peoples at
this time, ca !200 BC.
As for the forty years in the wilderness. Careful reading of
Exodus suggests the Jews spent 38 years travelling to, from or
staying at a place called Kadesh (there were a number of
places called Kadesh, alas.)

 

[PruePhillip]

But what happened to your dog wasn't the same as what happened in your dream.




Easy explanation. That person read or saw that happening on the news. Earlier that year, there were two plane crashes. The first plane crashed near NY and the second crashed in New Jersey. The one in New Jersey crashed into a tree and fell onto a house, which caught on fire.


And during that time, terrorism was on a high alert compared to a few years prior to that.

My obsession with terrorism the day I spent at the Twin Towers was about
the previous attack wih the basement bomb. At least, that was what I thought.
That guy who did the most accurate prediction - never found any information
about him since. Finding some connection with another plane crash is logical,
people have to come up with something other than the supernatural - it's a bit
like peope claiming an UFO account was people just seeing Venus or Jupiter
(as if they hadn't seen these two before.)

The dog one was weird - never had that experience before or since. The dream
doesn't have to be identical.

There's this thing in Quantum Mechanics called 'Entanglement', that is, paticles
connected on opposite sides of the universe. Some suggest these particles might
connect forward and back in time as well - giving some 'explanation' for why some
people have these events.
A guy was telling us he was dying of cancer. But he saw a mental picture of himself
in the future, playing with his kids. And in this mental picture he 'saw' a strange box
style device on the floor. No idea what it was. He survived and years later when
playing with his kids he looked at the little fan heater on the floor - a heater that had
recently come onto the market.

 

[Trailblazer]

And all of those are happening. So why do you think that these teachings are ahead of their time?

Look at the bulleted list again. Some but not all of these ideas are starting to be accepted in modern society.
Below are the ones that are starting to be accepted but that still leaves eight of them that are not yet accepted.

• Elimination of Prejudice of Every Kind
• Universal Compulsory Education
• Gender Equality
• The Abolition of the Extremes of Wealth and Poverty
• Human Rights for All

Do you think it's going to take 800 years to get there? And I mean, even Jesus didn't really accomplish what he set out to do.

I do not think it will take 800 years, but who really knows the future except God? There is no way to predict how long it will take and it will be a gradual process, as humans don't change their ideas overnight and people are generally resistant to change.

Jesus accomplished everything He set out to do. Why do you think He didn't? Below are a few verses that demonstrate that:

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

The primary purpose for which Jesus came to earth was to bear witness to the truth about God, as he says in the verse below:

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

But sadly, Christians have totally missed that purpose because they believe that Jesus came to save them form an original sin that Jesus never ever spoke of, and they believe the bodily resurrection is part of this purpose. NONE of this came from Jesus.

Actually, I was talking about the morality of using those scientific advances. Or do you think religious teachings about how to use genetic modification won't be required for another 800 years?

The moral teachings have already been revealed by Baha'u'llah, so people can now apply those teachings to the proper way to use genetic modification.

So again, is there nothing religion has to say about the use of these technologies?

Nothing in particular. Religion addresses moral behavior so people can apply what religion teaches to the use of modern technologies.

True. But what happened was an outright contradiction.

What was a contradiction? Sometimes it only appears to be contradictory if you don't have all the information.

Yeah, but sooner or later, someone in Age C is gonna say, "Why shouldn't the treatments that what we need today in Age C be THE SAME as what we needed in Age B?", which is a direct contradiction to what the guy living in Age B said about Age C.

Why do you think someone in Age C would say that? I think that by the time we get to Age C, humanity will have progressed so they will understand what Baha'u'llah wrote about the different Ages. In fact, I think most people will be Baha'is by the time we get to Age C.

By the way, that is what is happening now with older religions such as Christianity. We are living in Age B, and Christians say "Why shouldn't the treatments that we need today in Age B be THE SAME as what we needed in Age A?" Does that make sense to you that we need the same treatments that Jesus brought? Jesus said His work was finished in this world but that did not mean that no more work ever needed to be done in this world. Jesus laid the necessary foundation for the Kingdom of God to be built on earth and Baha'u'llah revealed what will be necessary to build the Kingdom of God, which Bahais refer to as the new world order, which will include all those things on the bulleted list I posted.

Except according to you, Jesus literally DID pass on the stuff about having a high standard of morality, and we still had the crusades.

The obvious reason we still had the crusades is because people were not following the teachings of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus were largely subordinated to the doctrines of Christianity early on. That was addressed in this thread I posted some time ago. I suggest you read the OP.

How Paul changed the course of Christianity

And what about the figures from before Jesus who preached very similar things? Buddha lived 600 years before Jesus, and their stories have many similarities:

• Conceived in a miraculous manner
• Similar names of mother (Maya for Buddha, Mary for Jesus)
• Was a bit of a child prodigy
• Underwent a long period of fasting while traveling alone
• Tempted by, but overcame, the devil
• Began an itinerant ministry around the age of 30
• Had disciples who traveled with him.
• Performed miracles, such as curing blindness and walking on water
• Renounced worldly riches and required his disciples to do so also
• Rebelled against the religious elite (Brahmans for Buddha and Pharisees for Jesus)
• Dispatched disciples, shortly before his death, to spread his message

Krishna also lived long before Jesus, and his story has similarities as well.

So why did God send a messenger to tell us the same thing that earlier messengers had been telling us?

You just raised a very important point. All the Messengers revealed the same spiritual teachings so naturally their stories are similar. I never meant that only Jesus revealed moral teachings, I was only using that as an example to contrast that with the primary purpose of Baha'u'llah's mission on earth, which was to reveal what will be necessary for humans to unite under one common religion and build a new world order.

In the following passage, the Law of God refers to the divinely revealed religion of God. The spiritual message (spiritual virtues and divine qualities) are the same in all the great world religions:

“the Law of God is divided into two parts. One is the fundamental basis which comprises all spiritual things—that is to say, it refers to the spiritual virtues and divine qualities; this does not change nor alter: it is the Holy of Holies, which is the essence of the Law of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Báb, and Bahá’u’lláh, and which lasts and is established in all the prophetic cycles. It will never be abrogated, for it is spiritual and not material truth; it is faith, knowledge, certitude, justice, piety, righteousness, trustworthiness, love of God, benevolence, purity, detachment, humility, meekness, patience and constancy. It shows mercy to the poor, defends the oppressed, gives to the wretched and uplifts the fallen......

These divine qualities, these eternal commandments, will never be abolished; nay, they will last and remain established for ever and ever. These virtues of humanity will be renewed in each of the different cycles; for at the end of every cycle the spiritual Law of God—that is to say, the human virtues—disappears, and only the form subsists.....

These foundations of the Religion of God, which are spiritual and which are the virtues of humanity, cannot be abrogated; they are irremovable and eternal, and are renewed in the cycle of every Prophet.

The second part of the Religion of God, which refers to the material world, and which comprises fasting, prayer, forms of worship, marriage and divorce, the abolition of slavery, legal processes, transactions, indemnities for murder, violence, theft and injuries—this part of the Law of God, which refers to material things, is modified and altered in each prophetic cycle in accordance with the necessities of the times.”
Some Answered Questions, pp. 47-48

In addition to these two parts of the Religion of God, we have the primary mission of each Messenger, which changes from age to age; and it is progressive, each mission building upon the previous one. Jesus focused on a high standard of morality and discipline into man, as the fundamental unit in human society. Muhammad focused on nation building, and Baha’u’llah focused on world unity and the oneness of mankind. Each one of these was a necessary building block that enabled the next one to take place. Mankind’s spiritual evolution develops gradually, proceeding step by step, and that is why God reveals religious Truth in various stages over time. That is called Progressive Revelation.

 

[samtonga43]

No, that is not the logical conclusion at all. The logical conclusion from reading that excerpt for a longer passage is that that all the Manifestations of God manifest God's attributes, and ONLY in that sense can they be considered God. The passage says "any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God" so if Baha'u'llah was God they would all be God.

Sorry, but the following says otherwise:
“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto.
“I am God” is not the same as “I manifest God’s attributes”. Surely you can see this. But maybe you are confused by all the eths and the verilys.

That's true, but that does not mean that every individual in every faith is guided by God.

True. Some only think they are, due to their disturbed state of mind.

P.S. Your posts are linking back to that other thread again, I have no idea why.

Maybe MrB is prompting you to return and respond…

 

[samtonga43]

Baha'u'llah is the Spirit of truth that Jesus was referring to in those verses and He did everything Jesus said He would do in the verses, including glorifying Jesus.

The Spirit of Truth came, almost 2000 years before the B,man was ever heard of.

 

[samtonga43]

No, because in my mind, according to how I have interpreted the evidence, that is logically impossible.

"According to how you have interpreted the evidence",
Right.

 

[Trailblazer]

Sorry, but the following says otherwise:
“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto.
“I am God” is not the same as “I manifest God’s attributes”. Surely you can see this. But maybe you are confused by all the eths and the verilys.

The problem you have is that none of the Manifestations of God ever said "I am God."

What Baha'u'llah meant is that we can think of them as God because they manifest God's attributes.

The Manifestations of God are only God in the sense that they manifest the Attributes of God.

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world.......” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 54

Moreover, a Manifestation OF GOD is not by definition GOD. A Manifestation of God manifests God's attributes, and that means there are two separate entities, (1) God and (2) the Manifestation of God.

One cannot be both God and a Manifestation of God at the same time because that is logically impossible.

 

[Trailblazer]

The Spirit of Truth came, almost 2000 years before the B,man was ever heard of.

Only according to Christian beliefs, but those are just beliefs, not facts.

 

[Tiberius]

I do not know what parts of that post would be relevant to you.

Well, you posted it for a reason. I assume that reason was because you think it was applicable to our current discussion. So copy and paste the parts that you think are relevant to our current discussion.

Also, you aren't a child, so don't make me hold your hand like this.

I did not get those from the Messenger, I got them from doing my own research on the Messenger.
How do you think I am going to KNOW anything about the Messenger if I don't do research on the Messenger?

So the writings of the messenger didn't come from the messenger?

 

[wandering peacefully]

So you are telling me that religious people never have a bias towards wanting their faith to be true? If you really have an MA in psychology, then I'm sure you'd agree that people are going to be more willing to accept things that support their viewpoints that things that disagree with their viewpoints, yes? Do you believe that this can never happen subconsciously? Do you believe it could never happen to you without you knowing about it?

I think you all are being to harsh on @TB. She has said before she only has an MA in counseling psychology which is an 18 month arts degree. She does not claim to have an MA in science or an MA in medical degree in psychology.

She has also stated many times, she is here for entertainment purposes, not to convince any one else she has the truth about all things God or the proof that her religion is the "truth".

What is probably very interesting to her and most who observe the back and forth, circular and repeated, non changing arguments, is that people continue to engage in them. Thousands of posts of the same back and forth yet people continue to want to try to convince her she is wrong in her logic. No matter how many try, they always fail to escape the circular logic and the urge to expose the percieved double speak. It is like an irresistible challenge to be the one to finally prove her wrong.

That will never happen but it provides entertainment. Like true crime shows, the psychology of it all is just plain addictive in trying to understand it and impossible to turn away from.
There will always be new attempts at proving her wrong with the same exact arguments because there is an endless supply of curious people who believe they can achieve the impossible.

One would think it would grow old but it never seems to. Why that is, is the really interesting question.

 

[CG Didymus]

“Were any of the all-embracing Manifestations of God to declare: “I am God,” He, verily, speaketh the truth, and no doubt attacheth thereto. For it hath been repeatedly demonstrated that through their Revelation, their attributes and names, the Revelation of God, His names and His attributes, are made manifest in the world......."
The logical conclusion must be that MrB. is God.

How many people that Baha'is say are manifestations made that claim? And Trailblazer goes out of her way to show that Jesus never claimed to be God. So who made this claim? Maybe all the incarnations of Vishnu and some of the other Hindu Gods? Time and time again I ask how do Baha'is make Adam, Noah, Abraham and even Moses manifestations? Even Christians and Jews don't make them manifestations. And what religion did they "found"? They are all from the same religion.