Atheists: If God existed…

[Trailblazer]

It doesn't bother me so much as it intrigues me, because I believe that if somebody is extremely firm in their belief then they must have good reasons for why they believe it. I am simply interested in what these reasons are, and become frustrated when people don't or can't provide them, or they do provide them and I find that they are not even remotely firm.

The primary reason I believe in the Baha’i Faith is because of what I read in books, on websites, and on forums, not the least of which are the Writings of Baha’u’llah, which I consider proof in and of itself. YMMV and that is fine. People view the same evidence differently.

Another reason I believe is because I was guided by God.

I believe a huge part of our disagreement centers around the fact that I DON'T know everything about you, because you won't give me a straightforward answer to most of my questions. The whole point is that I want to know WHY you believe what you believe, and you've provided little to nothing beyond "I read it and believed it".

The reason I believe is because of what I read in books, on websites, and on forums. That is a straightforward answer but apparently you do not accept it. I cannot do anything about that.

Another reason I believe is because I was guided by God.

Please do not ask me again why I believe in the Baha’i Faith because you won’t get any different answers. If you want me to elaborate on my answers, what I read that was so impressive, and why I think I was guided, I can try to explain that.

I do not know why it matters to you so much why “I believe” what I believe. We are different people with different backgrounds, so we would not come to belief the same way. You can ask other Baha’is how they came to believe in the Baha’i Faith and they would give you a different answer than I gave you.

Everyone has to come to belief in their own way. That is why Baha’u’llah wrote that the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone except himself.

 

[Phaedrus]

Everyone has to come to belief in their own way. That is why Baha’u’llah wrote that the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone except himself.

Of course, it helps that others believe it, as well. The community standard is what really brings others in, because if no one believed in it the rational course of thought is to understand its absurdity in relation to reality.

 

[Trailblazer]

That's a long time to go without sleep!

I sleep once in a while.

 

[Trailblazer]

Of course, it helps that others believe it, as well. The community standard is what really brings others in, because if no one believed in it the rational course of thought is to understand its absurdity in relation to reality.

What you are espousing is very close to the fallacy of 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." Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

The converse of this is that if many or most people do not believe it, it cannot be so, and that is fallacious. For example, there was a time in history when most people did not believe the earth was round, but most people were wrong, as we found out later.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The primary reason I believe in the Baha’i Faith is because of what I read in books, on websites, and on forums, not the least of which are the Writings of Baha’u’llah, which I consider proof in and of itself. YMMV and that is fine. People view the same evidence differently.

Then please tell me how you came to the conclusion that what you read was true?

Another reason I believe is because I was guided by God.

This is just another claim. How do you know (or conclude) that you were guided by God?

The reason I believe is because of what I read in books, on websites, and on forums. That is a straightforward answer but apparently you do not accept it. I cannot do anything about that.

Because it isn't an answer. I'm asking how you concluded that what you read was true. If you just read something and accepted it as true, then you don't have a good reason to believe it.

Please do not ask me again why I believe in the Baha’i Faith because you won’t get any different answers. If you want me to elaborate on my answers, what I read that was so impressive, and why I think I was guided, I can try to explain that.

Then do.

I do not know why it matters to you so much why “I believe” what I believe. We are different people with different backgrounds, so we would not come to belief the same way. You can ask other Baha’is how they came to believe in the Baha’i Faith and they would give you a different answer than I gave you.

Why does it bother you to be asked? If your belief is well-founded, why do you being questioned?

Everyone has to come to belief in their own way. That is why Baha’u’llah wrote that the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone except himself.

I see how this post dodges a lot of the more specific challenges I made in my last post, such as the fact that you have yet to retract your "impossible for what I believe to be wrong" statement (and your repeated attempts to cover it up rather than do so), your presumption that I am an atheist despite the fact that I have said nothing whatsoever about my personal beliefs, and your statement about having "absolute justification".

And especially my request for an apology regarding your comment about my mental health - something that I find personally offensive and disgusting. Will an apology for that remark be forthcoming?

 

[HonestJoe]

Sorry, but you kind of lost me. If God does not exist, isn’t that a good reason not to believe in God?

If God exists, God exists. There'd be no need for belief or faith, it's a definitive statement. The “if” makes it entirely hypothetical though, just empty (and circular) logic on its own. It doesn’t help us reach any rational practical conclusion in the real world.

Why is it irrational to believe one faith over all the others if one has determined that faith is the truth by doing adequate research?

If you’d determined it was true you wouldn’t have faith any more. All the different religious beliefs have people who say they have done adequate research, study and introspection to determine that they’re right and everyone else is wrong. You can’t all be right and you could very easily all be wrong. There is no reason to believe any one over all the others and no need to agree with any of you.

Why would a person need to compare that faith with all the others in order to know it is the truth?

It isn’t about comparing other faiths, it’s about acknowledging that other people are asking exactly the same questions as you in exactly the same way yet reaching entirely different conclusions. That would suggest to me that your methods (alone at least) aren’t effective for reaching the definitive truth.

The evidence that Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be is His character; the history of His life; what He did during His mission on earth; the scriptures that He wrote; what others have written about Him; the Bible prophecies that He fulfilled and the prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled; the predictions He made that have come to pass; the religion that was established as the result of His Revelation, what His followers all over the world have done and are doing now.

Muslims say exactly the same about Mohammed. Catholics say exactly the same about the line of Popes. Buddhists say exactly the same about Buddha. There is absolutely no logical reason to accept your “truth” over and above any of theirs and no reason to assume any of your “truths” are valid, in part or as a whole.

Why not, because you might not “like” the practices?

I’m not a fan of religion (distinct from belief) in general but that’s something of a different topic. My only point here that even if you established your “truth”, that is only one aspect of the bigger picture. Proving a god exists and proving that I should worship them are two entirely different things.

The evidence for religion will never be like the evidence presented and required in a court of law.

I don’t see why not in basic principle. The way things work in a court of law are really just a specifically refined form of how things work in science, or any other area where you need to try to determine the facts. The practical specifics are different but the underlying concepts are the same. I see no justification for treating theological claims any differently, especially if there definitive policies and acts as a consequence of your conclusions.

 

[Trailblazer]

I see how this post dodges a lot of the more specific challenges I made in my last post, such as the fact that you have yet to retract your "impossible for what I believe to be wrong" statement (and your repeated attempts to cover it up rather than do so), your presumption that I am an atheist despite the fact that I have said nothing whatsoever about my personal beliefs, and your statement about having "absolute justification".

I have already retracted my "impossible for what I believe to be wrong" statement several times. Why do you keep contradicting me? I told you that if you can prove that Baha’u’llah was a liar, con-man or delusional I will admit I am wrong about the Baha’i Faith.

So what if I presumed you were an atheist? It was an honest mistake and it means nothing negative because I have no issue with atheists. If I was wrong all you have to do is say that.

Explain why I cannot have absolute justification for my beliefs. Do I tell you what you need for justification of your beliefs?

And especially my request for an apology regarding your comment about my mental health - something that I find personally offensive and disgusting. Will an apology for that remark be forthcoming?

And calling me a liar is not offensive and disgusting?

I said: “If you misrepresent me again or contradict what I have clearly said you won’t hear from me again. IF you are so arrogant you are not even aware that is what you have been doing, that is not my problem. I did not come here to play psychologist.”

That was not about your mental health. All I meant is that I am not here to try to figure out why you misrepresent me and contradict me. It is not a mental health problem; if anything, it is a spiritual problem to think you know more about a person than they know about themselves, but I do not want to go over that again. Why not just let it go, forgive and forget and move on?

I will apologize for calling you arrogant, but you should apologize for calling me a liar, more than once. You are lucky I did not report you for that. Calling someone a liar is against the rules on all forums I post on.

I have to go to work now. I might answer the rest of your post later, but if you come back and contradict me again you won’t hear from me again, so IF your goal is to find out why I believe what I believe, you won’t contradict me again, as noted above.

Again, it is not impossible for what I believe to be wrong. I am wrong if Baha’u’llah was a liar, a con-man, or delusional, but you would have to prove that in order for me to admit I am wrong.

I will remind you that this is just a forum, it is not real life. I can walk away anytime I choose to. I have my own forum so I do not really even have time to be posting on this forum right now because I have lots of “real life” things going on that I should be tending to.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I have already retracted my "impossible for what I believe to be wrong" statement several times.

Could you direct me to where you retracted the statement?

Why do you keep contradicting me? I told you that if you can prove that Baha’u’llah was a liar, con-man or delusional I will admit I am wrong about the Baha’i Faith.

You said it was impossible "in your mind" for what you believe about Baha'u'llah to be false. That is what you wrote, and you have never once said "Actually, I retract that, it is possible for what I believe to be false".

So what if I presumed you were an atheist? It was an honest mistake and it means nothing negative because I have no issue with atheists. If I was wrong all you have to do is say that.

I am an atheist.

The question is why you presumed I was an atheist (despite me not talking about my beliefs) and why you brought it up.

Explain why I cannot have absolute justification for my beliefs. Do I tell you what you need for justification of your beliefs?

For the same reasons that you cannot claim that it is impossible for you to be wrong while also claiming to be open-minded or express the possibility of being wrong. If you honestly think your beliefs are "absolutely" justified, it expresses a lack of honest doubt and skepticism that indicates that you are not considering your beliefs rationally.

And calling me a liar is not offensive and disgusting?

I've not once called you a liar. What I did was point out something you said that was a lie. It's demonstrably a lie. You said:

Post 272
"I never said it is impossible that I am wrong, I said it seems like it would be impossible."

Are you telling me that the above statement is true?

I said: “If you misrepresent me again or contradict what I have clearly said you won’t hear from me again. IF you are so arrogant you are not even aware that is what you have been doing, that is not my problem. I did not come here to play psychologist.”

That was not about your mental health.

It is casting an insinuation that there is something wrong with my mental health, and that I need a psychologist.

All I meant is that I am not here to try to figure out why you misrepresent me and contradict me. It is not a mental health problem; if anything, it is a spiritual problem to think you know more about a person than they know about themselves, but I do not want to go over that again. Why not just let it go, forgive and forget and move on?

The real question is why you feel the need to misrepresent me (such as claiming that I called you liar, or that I am an atheist before you knew I was) or feel the need to distort your own words (such as denying that you ever claimed it was impossible for what you believe to be false).

I will apologize for calling you arrogant, but you should apologize for calling me a liar, more than once. You are lucky I did not report you for that. Calling someone a liar is against the rules on all forums I post on.

Please quote one time I have called you a liar.

I have to go to work now. I might answer the rest of your post later, but if you come back and contradict me again you won’t hear from me again, so IF your goal is to find out why I believe what I believe, you won’t contradict me again, as noted above.

Again, it is not impossible for what I believe to be wrong.

Then can you FINALLY just admit that what you wrote earlier was wrong? Why has it taken this long for you to do so?

I am wrong if Baha’u’llah was a liar, a con-man, or delusional, but you would have to prove that in order for me to admit I am wrong.

Again, I'll do that when you prove my cousin is not a genie.

I will remind you that this is just a forum, it is not real life. I can walk away anytime I choose to. I have my own forum so I do not really even have time to be posting on this forum right now because I have lots of “real life” things going on that I should be tending to.

That's fine, and I do genuinely appreciate people taking the time to post here, even if I find what they post to be personally frustrating. But you have to meet me in the middle on this, because at the moment it appears you want everything on your terms and aren't willing to entertain any other perspective. If you honestly and critically evaluate some of the things you have said to me, you would realize why it would give the impression that you are less open-minded than you would like to appear to be. I simply invite you, if you truly wish to portray yourself as open minded, to avoid falling into those same pitfalls in future.

If you truly do simply believe as you believe with as much conviction as you do, but you do not feel you can adequately elucidate the reasons for this conviction to somebody outside of your personal experiences, that's fine. I don't find that personally satisfactory, but your beliefs (and, indeed, the truth about reality) are under no any requirement to mold themselves to my personal standard. I understand that this is true of my position, as much as it is of anyone else's. But where I believe common ground can be found, I seek it out, and when I find that such a gap between my understanding and another person's perception becomes unbridgeable, it generally produces friction. I just want to know if you can understand why I have found your personal testimony unconvincing, even if you believe it is absolutely so. I get that I may not come across like this a lot of the time, and I apologize if you felt I have just been nothing but dismissive or contradictory of your beliefs, but please try to understand what it is about your own words that may have driven me to write the things that I have written.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I told you that if you can prove that Baha’u’llah was a liar, con-man or delusional I will admit I am wrong about the Baha’i Faith.

Can you do this for all the religions that you reject?

 

[Bird123]

I do not believe that anyone can Discover God without a Messenger of God because God is otherwise unknowable. We can see God reflected in all of Creation but that does not tell us about God’s Attributes or God’s Will for us. Messengers are the only way humans can know anything about God or God’s Will for us.

There is no point trying to convince me otherwise because my position is not going to change.

Given everyone has free will, you are free to believe what you want to and I am free to believe what I want to. I have no need to convince you of what I believe.

You have my best.

The Sky is blue. I am giving you Facts. I do not want you to Believe in anything.

Why do you think God is talking to your so called messengers and not to you? Where are your modern messengers? Perhaps there are too many people today who do Question.

Where are your million questions? Those who seek knowledge Question. Those who don't accept.

You are just as capable as anyone to Discover God. It does take work and the use of intellect. When you Discover God, God will no longer be a Belief. When you Discover God, you will Discover those messengers are no messengers at all.

The great scientists who Discover things venture into Undiscovered country searching for the Real Truth. They do not blindly follow waiting for others to serve up the answers.

Free choice is an important part of God's learning system. One's choices show God and the world what one needs and chooses to learn.

Yes, I do see and understand.

Oh yes. I think you need that Atheist friend of yours.Ask them what part of that holy book does not add up. If you can not come up with questions yourself, that Atheist will help you. Stories of mankind will not add up. That Atheist will help you Widen your view.

 

[Trailblazer]

If God exists, God exists. There'd be no need for belief or faith, it's a definitive statement. The “if” makes it entirely hypothetical though, just empty (and circular) logic on its own. It doesn’t help us reach any rational practical conclusion in the real world.

If God exists and we cannot prove that there would be a need for belief and faith.

If you’d determined it was true you wouldn’t have faith any more. All the different religious beliefs have people who say they have done adequate research, study and introspection to determine that they’re right and everyone else is wrong. You can’t all be right and you could very easily all be wrong. There is no reason to believe any one over all the others and no need to agree with any of you.

I have determined that the Baha’i Faith is true, but I still need faith to believe that God exists and has certain Attributes, because that can never be proven.

Again, the fact that all the different religious believers say they have done adequate research and they are right about their beliefs does not mean I am not right about my beliefs. Logically speaking, my Baha’i beliefs are either true or false, and what other religious believers believe has no bearing on that.

There is no reason for you to believe any one religion over all the others and no for you to agree with any religion unless you have done your own research and determined “for yourself” you believe that religion is true.

It isn’t about comparing other faiths, it’s about acknowledging that other people are asking exactly the same questions as you in exactly the same way yet reaching entirely different conclusions. That would suggest to me that your methods (alone at least) aren’t effective for reaching the definitive truth.

How do you know that other people are asking exactly the same questions as me in exactly the same way and that we have the same methods of determining the answers?

Muslims say exactly the same about Mohammed. Catholics say exactly the same about the line of Popes. Buddhists say exactly the same about Buddha. There is absolutely no logical reason to accept your “truth” over and above any of theirs and no reason to assume any of your “truths” are valid, in part or as a whole.

They can SAY anything they want to SAY, but do they have evidence to support it?

I do not think any of those religions say that the Bible prophecies or the prophecies of other religions were fulfilled by their Prophet.

I’m not a fan of religion (distinct from belief) in general but that’s something of a different topic. My only point here that even if you established your “truth”, that is only one aspect of the bigger picture. Proving a god exists and proving that I should worship them are two entirely different things.

First, nobody can prove that God exists, all we have is evidence that indicates that.

If the evidence indicated “to you” that God exists, why wouldn’t you want to worship that God?

I don’t see why not in basic principle. The way things work in a court of law are really just a specifically refined form of how things work in science, or any other area where you need to try to determine the facts. The practical specifics are different but the underlying concepts are the same. I see no justification for treating theological claims any differently, especially if there definitive policies and acts as a consequence of your conclusions.

And that is why you are an atheist.

God cannot be proved as a fact, like a scientific fact, because God is immaterial and unknowable. We can only have facts about the Messengers of God, and with those facts we can choose to believe they represented God or not.

 

[Trailblazer]

The Sky is blue. I am giving you Facts. I do not want you to Believe in anything.

Why do you think God is talking to your so called messengers and not to you? Where are your modern messengers? Perhaps there are too many people today who do Question.

There have been no new Messengers since Baha'u'llah. His Revelation is so vast and will suit the needs of humanity for at least 1000 years. After that time has transpired, there will be another Messenger at some point in time.

Where are your million questions? Those who seek knowledge Question. Those who don't accept.

I do not question the answers God has provided because it is illogical to question an omniscient God.
However, I have a lot of questions about what the scriptures mean and I have a lot of questions about God.

You are just as capable as anyone to Discover God. It does take work and the use of intellect. When you Discover God, God will no longer be a Belief. When you Discover God, you will Discover those messengers are no messengers at all.

As I have already explained, I do not believe that people Discover God. How would they do that? How would they know that what they Discovered had anything to do with God? It could be their own ego projection. That cannot happen with Messengers because they get messages directly from God through the Holy Spirit, so what they say or write represents the Attributes and Will of God.

The great scientists who Discover things venture into Undiscovered country searching for the Real Truth. They do not blindly follow waiting for others to serve up the answers.

But of course scientists Discover truth about the material world but that is not Truth about God.

Free choice is an important part of God's learning system. One's choices show God and the world what one needs and chooses to learn.

Yes, we learn by using our free will to make choices and dealing with the consequences of our choices, be they positive or negative. then we move on to another lesson.

Oh yes. I think you need that Atheist friend of yours. Ask them what part of that holy book does not add up. If you can not come up with questions yourself, that Atheist will help you. Stories of mankind will not add up. That Atheist will help you Widen your view.

Holy books are not stories of mankind, they are the Word of God that comes throughout the ages.

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

The Revelations of God add up because God is All-Knowing and All-Wise, so God knows what is best for humans. Non-religious people do not even try to understand them but instead of disagree with them because they think they know more than God, which is logically impossible, since God is All-Knowing.

 

[Trailblazer]

Can you do this for all the religions that you reject?

Not all, but some.

 

[Tiberius]

An atheist on my forum said: “if God existed, then proof of his existence would be possible. The proof isn't there, and the best explanation for that lack of proof would be that neither is the god there.”

If God existed, would God provide proof of His existence? If you answer yes, please explain why you think that God would provide proof of His existence.

Is it possible that God exists and has chosen not to provide proof of His existence? If you think it possible that God exists and has chosen not to provide proof of His existence, why do you think God would choose not to provide proof of His existence?

I am not talking about evidence, I am talking about absolute proof, in which case God would be established as a fact, like a scientific fact everyone would agree upon.

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: https://www.google.com/search

God doesn't have to provide proof of his existence, but I do have to point out that if God wants more than anything for me to believe in him and will punish me with eternal torment if I don't, yet deliberately withholds the evidence I require for belief, then how does he justify punishing me for my lack of faith?

 

[Trailblazer]

The real question is why you feel the need to misrepresent me (such as claiming that I called you liar, or that I am an atheist before you knew I was).

It was an honest mistake for me to assume you were an atheist. That has no derogatory connotations, and it certainly is not anything like you calling me a liar, over and over again.

Claiming you called me a liar is not misrepresenting you because you repeatedly called me a liar on more than one occasion. Why not just admit it?

Please quote one time I have called you a liar.

Here are all the times you called me a liar, all of them that I could find.

No, Trailblazer, it's not a strawman and that is a lie. You clearly stated only a few posts ago:

Post 163:
"In my mind, it is impossible that what I believe about Baha’u’llah is not true, because there is too much evidence that shows that He was who He claimed to be."

That's a lie. You didn't use the word "seems", you just said "it is."

By asserting that it is "impossible" for what you believe to not be true, you are asserting that it is impossible for you to be wrong.

Instead of lying and constantly twisting your own words, why not just retract them and admit you were exaggerating? It happens. If you had done that several pages ago I would have dropped this entire issue long ago, but that fact that you keep denying that you said it, denying that it means what it clearly means, lying about the wording and accusing me of "making it up" is just making you look worse. Just admit that it's something you shouldn't have written and isn't an accurate reflection of what you actually believe about your position.

Lie. Your own words.

You're lying again. What you said was that you believe it was impossible for what you believe to be wrong. Why do you constantly have to change your own words to defend them? Just retract the statement, already.

I never lied at all. In post #331 I said:

I never claimed I cannot be wrong, I said I do not believe I am wrong. Those are different statements.

I said if you want to prove me wrong, now that I have critically evaluated and questioned my own beliefs, you will have to dig up some dirt on Baha’u’llah.

Why it is so important to you to make me admit I was wrong? In my opinion, that is a question you should ask yourself, because only you have the answer.

When I first started posting on forums about seven years ago, it was important to me to prove I was right, not about my beliefs, but about things I had said. But when I realized that it was just my ego needing to prove I was right I grew out of that and I no longer need to prove anything to anyone. I know what I said and what I meant, and after I have explained that I expect people to accept my explanation because anything less than that is akin to calling me a liar, which is what you have been doing.

I finally had to leave one forum where the owner falsely accused me of having intentions that “I knew” I did not have. Nobody has the right to speak for my intentions because nobody can know the intentions of anyone else unless that person states their intentions. For him to keep contradicting me, after I clearly stated my intentions, is saying (a) I do not know my own mind and he knows my mind better than I do, or (b) I am a liar. Do you understand how disrespectful that is, how arrogant?

66: O EMIGRANTS! The tongue I have designed for the mention of Me, defile it not with detraction. If the fire of self overcome you, remember your own faults and not the faults of My creatures, inasmuch as every one of you knoweth his own self better than he knoweth others.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 45

The reason I started posting on RF in December 2017 is because I left that forum. He actually did me a big favor because I was not learning or growing on his forum, but I have learned a lot and grown a lot spiritually since I came to RF.

Being right is not important to me. I am wrong a lot and I make a lot of mistakes. The important thing is that I can admit to them and move on.

It does not bother me to be wrong, but I won’t admit I was wrong unless I was wrong because that is dishonest and not in accordance with justice.

I am not obligated to direct you anywhere.

Days ago I said “In my mind, it is impossible that what I believe about Baha’u’llah is not true.” Then later I admitted I could be wrong about what is in my mind, and I told you how you could prove I am wrong. I have told you numerous times that I could be wrong and the way you could prove that I am wrong is to prove that Baha’u’llah was a liar, a con-man or delusional.

I told you this morning that IF your goal is to find out why I believe what I believe, you won’t contradict me again. I would have told you how I concluded that what I read was true and how I know I was guided by God, but obviously you cannot stop contradicting me so now you will never know.

You just saved me a lot of work.

Nobody on this forum has ever called me a liar and I have been an active poster for almost two years. You owe me an apology for calling me a liar but I do not expect to get one, and I do not care if I get one because I know I never lied. Just because you misunderstood what I said is no reason to call me a liar. The way people deal with misunderstandings is to try to clarify what someone means rather than insisting they know and calling people liars.

 

[Trailblazer]

God doesn't have to provide proof of his existence, but I do have to point out that if God wants more than anything for me to believe in him and will punish me with eternal torment if I don't, yet deliberately withholds the evidence I require for belief, then how does he justify punishing me for my lack of faith?

God does not punish anyone for lack of belief. What happens is that they miss out on knowing and loving God, but if they cannot believe in the evidence God provided after making a sincere effort to believe, God understands. We do not all have the same capacity for belief.

“From the exalted source, and out of the essence of His favor and bounty He hath entrusted every created thing with a sign of His knowledge, so that none of His creatures may be deprived of its share in expressing, each according to its capacity and rank, this knowledge. This sign is the mirror of His beauty in the world of creation. The greater the effort exerted for the refinement of this sublime and noble mirror, the more faithfully will it be made to reflect the glory of the names and attributes of God, and reveal the wonders of His signs and knowledge.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 262

 

[FooYang]

If God existed, I would be able to touch him right now and probably make out with his sexy face too.

 

[ArtieE]

Spiritual growth simply means to work towards acquiring the divine perfections; the attributes of our spiritual nature are shown forth in love, mercy, kindness, truth and justice, high aspirations, philanthropy, one and all being expressions of his higher nature. Every good habit, every noble quality belongs to man’s spiritual nature, which is the essence of life.

What you call attributes of "spiritual" or "higher" nature are just evolved "attributes" selected for by evolution and natural selection.

 

[ArtieE]

God only reveals His Will through Messengers, otherwise God is hiding. The reasons for God’s actions are only revealed through Messengers of God, anything else we come up with is the product of human imagination.

Holy books were revealed by Manifestations of God (what I often refer to as Messengers or Prophets). Some of the Holy books were written by men, but these men were guided by the Holy Spirit. There is nothing “petty” in the Torah, the Bible, the Qur’an, or the Writings of Baha’u’llah.

Buddha was one of your prophets. "Buddhism is not about either believing or not believing in God or gods. Rather, the historical Buddha taught that believing in gods was not useful for those seeking to realize enlightenment. In other words, God is unnecessary in Buddhism"
Are Buddhists Also Atheists?
It seems that the Baha'i don't believe in reincarnation. So they are contradicting a person they themselves call a prophet and a messenger of God.
Reincarnation—The Soul’s Journey on the Wheel of Birth and Death

 

[Bird123]

There have been no new Messengers since Baha'u'llah. His Revelation is so vast and will suit the needs of humanity for at least 1000 years. After that time has transpired, there will be another Messenger at some point in time.

I do not question the answers God has provided because it is illogical to question an omniscient God.
However, I have a lot of questions about what the scriptures mean and I have a lot of questions about God.

As I have already explained, I do not believe that people Discover God. How would they do that? How would they know that what they Discovered had anything to do with God? It could be their own ego projection. That cannot happen with Messengers because they get messages directly from God through the Holy Spirit, so what they say or write represents the Attributes and Will of God.

But of course scientists Discover truth about the material world but that is not Truth about God.

Yes, we learn by using our free will to make choices and dealing with the consequences of our choices, be they positive or negative. then we move on to another lesson.

Holy books are not stories of mankind, they are the Word of God that comes throughout the ages.

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

The Revelations of God add up because God is All-Knowing and All-Wise, so God knows what is best for humans. Non-religious people do not even try to understand them but instead of disagree with them because they think they know more than God, which is logically impossible, since God is All-Knowing.

your quote:How would they know that what they Discovered had anything to do with God? It could be their own ego projection.

My Answer: Everyone already knows God. Names are never needed because everyone already knows who everyone is.

Ego projection is a fair question. My Answer: God has ways far beyond anything mankind is capable of including any possible ego projection.

your quote:
That cannot happen with Messengers because they get messages directly from God through the Holy Spirit, so what they say or write represents the Attributes and Will of God.

My Answer: It all comes down to what you want and you want to believe God directed your messengers to tell you what to do. You have no other proof these messengers really received messages from God except their word they did. And yet, when I say I have had direct contact with God, I am not a messenger. Is it easier to believe those you can not confront or is it just easier to believe what you want to believe?

I say those messengers never came from God. Why? If one really knows God, it is clear the messengers do not in what they write. They do not understand God at all.

I understand you are not ready. That's OK. In time, your path will lead this way.