Atheists: If God existed would God……

[Truthseeker]

Yet can demonstrate nothing to support all this "research", beyond quoting the religion's texts. No objective evidence and relentlessly irrational arguments, not very compelling, given the claims and arguments are ostensibly the same as all other religions.

She is not trying to prove anything. She has said this over and over again. To me in private also. She is just stating what she believes. She quotes the religious texts because that best expresses what she believes.

As to objective evidence:

And those who have no knowledge say: Why doth not Alláh speak unto us, or some sign come unto us? Even thus, as they now speak, spake those (who were) before them. Their hearts are all alike. We have made clear the revelations for people who are sure.
Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdu’lláh, "The Meaning of the Glorious Qur’án", 2:118

And they who have no knowledge say, "Unless God speak to us, or thou shew us a sign . . . !" So, with like words, said those who were before them: their hearts are alike: Clear signs have we already shewn for those who have firm faith:
Muhammad, "The Qur'an", 2.114

118. Say those without knowledge: “Why speaketh not God Unto us? Or why cometh not Unto us a Sign?” So said the people before them Words of similar import. Their hearts are alike. We have indeed made clear The Signs unto any people Who hold firmly To Faith (in their hearts).
Muhammad , "The Holy Qur-an", 2.118

 

[Sheldon]

No, I have not stated or asserted that what I believe is true without providing evidence.

Just no objective evidence.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Yet can demonstrate nothing to support all this "research", beyond quoting the religion's texts. No objective evidence and relentlessly irrational arguments, not very compelling, given the claims and arguments are ostensibly the same as all other religions.

She is not trying to prove anything. She has said this over and over again.

Do you see the word proof anywhere in my post?

As to objective evidence:

And those who have no knowledge say: Why doth not Alláh speak unto us, or some sign come unto us? Even thus, as they now speak, spake those (who were) before them. Their hearts are all alike. We have made clear the revelations for people who are sure.
Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdu’lláh, "The Meaning of the Glorious Qur’án", 2:118

That's just a quote from a religious text, it's not objective evidence. It also looks like a no true Scotsman fallacy, they abound in religious texts.

 

[samtonga43]

Tb said:
"No, I have not stated or asserted that what I believe is true without providing evidence".
***
Evidence? What type of evidence have you provided?

 

[Sheldon]

Tb said:
"No, I have not stated or asserted that what I believe is true without providing evidence".
***
Evidence? What type of evidence have you provided?

Anecdotal and subjective, quoting religious texts mostly.

 

[Trailblazer]

Evidence? What type of evidence have you provided?

Sorry, I am not going around that block again.

 

[samtonga43]

Sorry, I am not going around that block again.

Objective evidence?
Subjective evidence?

 

[Trailblazer]

Objective evidence?
Subjective evidence?

What is subjective and objective evidence?

Subjective evidence is evidence that we cannot evaluate. In fact, we have two choices; to accept what somebody says or reject it. ... Objective evidence is evidence that we can examine and evaluate for ourselves.
Objective evidence - definition and meaning - Market ...

We can examine and evaluate the evidence for Baha'u'llah for ourselves because there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah so in that sense it is objective evidence.

 

[samtonga43]

What is subjective and objective evidence?
Subjective evidence is evidence that we cannot evaluate. In fact, we have two choices; to accept what somebody says or reject it. ... Objective evidence is evidence that we can examine and evaluate for ourselves.
Objective evidence - definition and meaning - Market ...
We can examine and evaluate the evidence for Baha'u'llah for ourselves because there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah so in that sense it is objective evidence.

Objective information is based on fact.
Subjective information is based on opinion or experience.

I have looked for facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. I found none.
However, you obviously have found some. What are those facts?
***
You may find this useful: Objectivity | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Can We Know Objective Reality?
The subjective is characterized primarily by perceiving mind. The objective is characterized primarily by physical extension in space and time. The simplest sort of discrepancy between subjective judgment and objective reality is well illustrated by John Locke’s example of holding one hand in ice water and the other hand in hot water for a few moments.

When one places both hands into a bucket of tepid water, one experiences competing subjective experiences of one and the same objective reality. One hand feels it as cold, the other feels it as hot. Thus, one perceiving mind can hold side-by-side clearly differing impressions of a single object.

From this experience, it seems to follow that two different perceiving minds could have clearly differing impressions of a single object. That is, two people could put their hands into the bucket of water, one describing it as cold, the other describing it as hot. Or, more plausibly, two people could step outside, one describing the weather as chilly, the other describing it as pleasant.

 

[joelr]

Objective evidence?
Subjective evidence?

A few years ago in a long thread about this someone posted a link to a book which explained how to know a messenger of God.
The criteria was, new philosophy, new science, prophecy, and maybe one other?
I investigated these. The philosophy is non-existent. Not even basic Greek philosophy never mind Kant or Hume or anything. It's just lots of praise literature and re-workig basic Quran/Bible/Hindu basics about be nice to people.
The science was only science that was popular at that time (like the ether), literal misunderstandings of evolution, cells, elements, and definitely nothing new. The prophecy was silly. A war prediction (which was also being predicted by politicians). A misunderstanding of a prophecy that was applied to a garden their foundation built but the "garden" was talking about an earthly paradise. Not an actual garden on a hill. I took the time to investigate but no person in the religion was interested in that except to find weird apologetics (maybe the ether will still be discovered, maybe we don't understand elements correctly).
Then the "God doesn't have to prove himself.." stuff. He also predicted something from deep in the earth would poison the atmosphere I think? So that became a prediction of nuclear material. Of course nuclear material is made in a giant lab and it's a long and expensive process. You don't dig it up and it's bomb material. And it contaminates the ground mainly. That is really like someting a psychic would say and then hope someday we would find something to attach it onto.
Why can't God just give one good piece of science or math or cure for cancer? The entire Gleanings is just "behold, God is the best ever, rejoice at his power,,,,,it just never ends? There is nothing here?
Can someone point out something of substance? At least the OT has stories with meanings.
Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh | Bahá’í Reference Library

 

[Trailblazer]

I have looked for facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. I found none.
However, you obviously have found some. What are those facts?

Facts about Baha'u'llah can be found in the following books:
God Passes By (1844-1944)
The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4, which cover the 40 years of His Mission, from 1853-1892

 

[samtonga43]

Facts about Baha'u'llah can be found in the following books:
God Passes By (1844-1944)
The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4, which cover the 40 years of His Mission, from 1853-1892

Yes, I have looked through these books, but found no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.
Will you C/P some of the facts you have found?

 

[Trailblazer]

no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah

There are no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah since a Revelation from God is not a fact.
There are only facts about Baha'u'llah.

 

[samtonga43]

There are no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah since a Revelation from God is not a fact.
There are only facts about Baha'u'llah.

But you said above that there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.
Can you tell me a few of those facts?

 

[samtonga43]

Just popped in to see if Tb has managed to reconcile her following statements:

"There are no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah".
"There are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah".
?

 

[Trailblazer]

Just popped in to see if Tb has managed to reconcile her following statements:

"There are no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah".
"There are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah".
?

Please quote me saying "There are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah".
Otherwise that is a misrepresentation of what I said and you are making a straw man.

Below is what I actually said and what you said back.

Facts about Baha'u'llah can be found in the following books:
#2611 Trailblazer, Wednesday at 8:33 AM

Yes, I have looked through these books, but found no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.
Will you C/P some of the facts you have found?
#2612 samtonga43, Wednesday at 3:41 PM

There are no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah since a Revelation from God is not a fact.
There are only facts about Baha'u'llah.
#2613 Trailblazer, Wednesday at 3:54 PM

But you said above that there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.
Can you tell me a few of those facts?
#2614 samtonga43, Wednesday at 4:01 PM

 

[samtonga43]

Please quote me saying "There are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah".

"...there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah so in that sense it is objective evidence". Tb

 

[Trailblazer]

"...there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah so in that sense it is objective evidence". Tb

Why did you quote me out of context?

I said:
We can examine and evaluate the evidence for Baha'u'llah for ourselves because there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah so in that sense it is objective evidence.
#2608 Trailblazer, Tuesday at 3:54 PM

When I said there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah I meant that there are facts that pertain to the history of the 40-year mission of Baha’u’llah.

Objective evidence of WHAT? The facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah are objective evidence that Baha'u'llah completed a 40-year mission.

I never claimed that the facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah is objective evidence that Baha’u’llah received a Revelation from God. There can be no objective evidence that any alleged Messenger of God received messages from God. That has to be believed on faith.

 

[samtonga43]

Why did you quote me out of context?

I did not quote you out of context.

I never claimed that the facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah is objective evidence that Baha’u’llah received a Revelation from God.

And I did not say that you did. Objective evidence or not, you did say that there are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. Whether these facts are objective evidence or not is irrelevant. The only point I am making is that you have contradicted yourself once again, by saying that ...
1. There are facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.
and
2. There are no facts about the Revelation of Baha'u'llah.

You must see that both cannot be true.

 

[samtonga43]

I see that you find my post 'optimistic'. Does this mean that you agree that both cannot be true?

Can you see now that there cannot, logically, be facts and no facts?