Atheists: If God existed would God……

[Trailblazer]

Lol whatever it is the your objections are.

I don't have any objections since I don't hold grudges. Every minute is a new minute.

 

[ppp]

The Mormon faith is not a *new* world religion. It is an offshoot of Christianity.

Offshoot religion created in the world, are new world religions

 

[ppp]

I don't have any objections since I don't hold grudges. Every minute is a new minute.

Then you have no reason to engage with me. Have a lovely night.

 

[Trailblazer]

No, actually, it would not. That isn't how evidence works.

Then how do you think it works?

You became convinced by what you convinced yourself to be evidence.

No, that is not what happened and you do not know what happened to me. I *believed* it was evidence. You don't believe it is evidence. The right thing to do is to agree to disagree, not to speak for other people.

I had no interest in it being evidence because I was not searching for God or a religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

Offshoot religion created in the world, are new world religions

Call it what you like, but it is promoting Jesus so I see it as an offshoot of Christianity.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then you have no reason to engage with me. Have a lovely night.

I don't unless I get a post from you like I just did.

 

[ppp]

Call it what you like, but it is promoting Jesus so I see it as an offshoot of Christianity.

I do too. Islam is also an offshoot of Christianity. Islam is an old world religion because it was created in the old world. LDS is a new world religion because it was created in NY State.

 

[Trailblazer]

Islam is also an offshoot of Christianity.

How so?

 

[lukethethird]

So you would rather have a religion that promises continual war?

The Baha'i Faith intends to do no such thing. Baha'i Laws only apply to Baha'is and there is no jail.

Considering the bloody history of religions and the politics of the religious right around the world, who can trust religions that promise peace?

 

[lukethethird]

Okay. I will buy that definition of tribalist. Though I generally think of tribalist as being some level of exclusionist. Or at least difficult to penetrate. Like Judaism. You can convert to do Judaism but The petitioner has to go through hurdles to get let in. Whereas Christianity and Baha'i are theologically promiscuous.

Entire nations act out in tribal ways, especially leading up to war, or consider how some have reacted to covid.

 

[ppp]

Entire nations act out in tribal ways, especially leading up to war, or consider how some have reacted to covid.

Sure. ??? I'm not sure if your point

 

[Trailblazer]

Considering the bloody history of religions and the politics of the religious right around the world, who can trust religions that promise peace?

Times change and people can change so there is no reason to believe that history has to repeat itself. Moreover, the Baha'i Faith has a 'plan' for world peace.'

The Promise of World Peace

 

[F1fan]

The attacks are FIRST launched by the atheists.

The "attacks" were against claims and logical fallacies, not the people.

Believers are just responding to them with appropriate comments.

Incorrect. Appropriate responses would have been answers to the questions instead of demeaning comments and evasion.

 

[F1fan]

I have no problem with most atheists, including @TagliatelliMonster.
I only have a problem with atheists that label all believers with a broad stroke of a brush and call us illogical, irrational, not critical thinkers, and emotionally needy. This is unnecessary and also untrue. People can hold their ground without knocking other people down, if they feel secure in their position.

I've not seen broad brush judgments. I have seen specific explanations about behaviors that theists do. I have done many of these. I understand you don't like it.

I answer all the hard questions, you just don't like my answers. Then comes the attack.

The attack is how you are told that your answers are insufficiently accurate, including inconsistency, poor definitions, logical fallacies, evasion, etc. I understand you don't like the criticisms, but that is part of religious debate.

We see defensive behavior when either atheists or believers feel pressured to answer hard questions, and the natural emotional response is to attack. I am sorry if you cannot see that this is a two-way street.

I have seen atheists get angry when they are insulted and their questions ignored.

 

[F1fan]

That's right, but if they were actually Messengers from God it would be objective evidence of that.

But there is no objective evidence of anyone being an authentic messenger of God, so irrelevant. Plus theists will value their texts and prophets as they wish, and via faith, so there is no objective test.

I do not expect other people to take me seriously or believe what I do. Why would they, unless they knew what I know, and even then they might reject it or remain undecided.

People with credible arguments are convincing.

Not exactly. What it really means is that I *became convinced* by the evidence.

And this is something you've been unable to convince thinkers is true.

 

[lukethethird]

Times change and people can change so there is no reason to believe that history has to repeat itself. Moreover, the Baha'i Faith has a 'plan' for world peace.'

The Promise of World Peace

Great, another religious plan for world peace, we know how they work out.

 

[lukethethird]

Sure. ??? I'm not sure if your point

Sets of beliefs keep a tribe together, Q anon followers feel a sense of belonging, nothing inclusive about that at all, you just have to believe the same unevidenced claims in order to belong.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you're not willing to even consider the possibility that the god you believe in doesn't actually exist, based on new evidence or observations?

What new evidence and observations would those be? How would they show that my God does not exist?

The problem is that you said this earlier (my emphasis);
Trailblazer said: ↑
God wants everyone to know that He exists but not as an objective fact.

What I said in its full context is as follows:

“No, I do not believe that God ever wants to be known as an objective fact. God wants everyone to know that He exists but not as an objective fact. There are other ways of knowing, and that is how God wants us to know Him. This is something atheists simply do not understand. They say I believe and I don’t know, but I do know.”

I do not know what God wants unless it was revealed in scripture, and in that case I would believe I know. I don’t know anywhere in scripture where it says that God wants everyone to know that He exists.

I believe (but I do not know) that God wants everyone to know that He exists but my belief is not derived from scriptures so it is just a personal opinion. It is just as possible that God does not want everyone to know that He exists, and it is even possible that God does not care if anyone knows that He exists.

However, since I believe that God sends Messengers it makes sense to me that God ‘at least’ wants the people who recognize His Messengers to know that He exists, and since I believe that God wants everyone to recognize His Messengers that would mean that God wants everyone to know that He exists.

When I said ” I do not believe that God ever wants to be known as an objective fact” that was based upon deductive reasoning; since God has not proven to humans that He exists as an objective fact, I concluded that He does not want to be known that way.

If there is a god who truly has no wants or needs, why would it matter whether any of us believed in him at all? Why would such a god send messengers or inspire religions? Why would they have anything to do with humans at all? (Note that an answer along the lines of "We can't know the mind of God!" is invalid unless you can support that assertion in any way).

I do not think it matters to God if anyone believes that He exists for God’s benefit, since God has no needs. I believe that God only wants us to believe that He exists for human benefit. I believe that because it makes sense to me and also because that is what Baha’u’llah wrote.

It does not affect God if we choose not to believe in Him. Baha’u’llah made it perfectly clear that God has no needs since God is self-sufficient, thus God cannot have a “need” for humans to believe He exists

“This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.”
Gleanings, p. 136

“Your Lord, the God of mercy, can well dispense with all creatures. Nothing whatever can either increase or diminish the things He doth possess.” Gleanings, p. 148

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures.” Gleanings, p. 166

God does not demand that humans believe in Him, God enjoins us to believe in Him, and that is only for our own benefit, not for God’s benefit.

“Consider the mercy of God and His gifts. He enjoineth upon you that which shall profit you, though He Himself can well dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings, p. 140

“The one true God, exalted be His glory, hath wished nothing for Himself. The allegiance of mankind profiteth Him not, neither doth its perversity harm Him. The Bird of the Realm of Utterance voiceth continually this call: “All things have I willed for thee, and thee, too, for thine own sake.” Gleanings, p. 260

In sum, given these excerpts from the Writings of Baha’u’llah, we can deduce that God wants humans to believe in Him and get His messages. However, it is abundantly clear that God needs nothing for Himself because God is self-sufficient, above having needs. Clearly, God sends Messengers only for the benefit of humans. God cares about humans so God wants them to believe in Him and His Messenger, but God does not need anyone to believe in Him and His Messenger because God does not have needs. Only humans have needs.

God has the power to dispense with all of His creatures in one split second but He doesn’t only because He loves them. Why would God create humans if He did not love them? And if He did not love them anymore, why would He not just wipe them out? But He doesn’t do that. Instead God keeps sending Messengers in every age, no doubt hoping that people will recognize them, but not requiring that they do.

You mean exactly the same way you do, as you stated in the previous quote? I think you (and a lot of other people, theist and atheist alike) need to shift away from the simplistic idea of theist vs atheist, believer vs non-believer, instead recognising that we're all just individuals, each with a unique set of beliefs and viewpoints that can't be simply generalised.

No, no two people think exactly alike even if we agree on certain things.

You are preaching to the choir. I only wish you could convince your fellow atheists to shift away from the simplistic idea of theist vs atheist, believer vs non-believer, and that we're all just individuals, each with a unique set of beliefs and viewpoints that can't be generalized.

An internally consistent definition could be the basis for a viable hypothesis that could then be tested. At that point, the hypothesis is neither supported or countered and would be treated as such. Note that nothing in that description is specifically about gods, these are standard principles that apply to anything.

How could you test your hypothesis unless you were able to know what the hypothesized God was actually doing?

You're still just making empty assertions. What characteristic exactly renders souls immune to science? Why could they not be studied via their "signs" (or effects as it would normally be called), in the same way as we have with countless other phenomena that we can't (or couldn't at the time) directly measure?

I am not asserting what I believe about the soul, I believe it. The reason I believe it can never be studied and measured by scientists is because Baha’u’llah wrote that the soul is a mystery.

“Thou hast asked Me concerning the nature of the soul. Know, verily, that the soul is a sign of God, a heavenly gem whose reality the most learned of men hath failed to grasp, and whose mystery no mind, however acute, can ever hope to unravel.” Gleanings, pp. 158-159

“Verily I say, the human soul is, in its essence, one of the signs of God, a mystery among His mysteries. It is one of the mighty signs of the Almighty, the harbinger that proclaimeth the reality of all the worlds of God. Within it lieth concealed that which the world is now utterly incapable of apprehending.” Gleanings, p. 160

Baha’u’llah wrote that the world is now utterly incapable of apprehending the nature of the soul but that does not mean that I the future it won’t be possible to know more about the soul than we know now. There are many things that humans could not understand back when the Bible was recorded that we now understand owing to advancements in science.

This isn't a discussion about religion, it is a discussion about whether any gods exist. Any question about whether something exists should focus on facts and reality.

If the existence of God(s) cannot be proven as a fact where does that leave this discussion? I believe that God exists in reality, but atheists do not accept my beliefs because they require objective evidence, which would be proof that God exists.

I think anything which exists can be subject to observation and inquiry, though there are limitations to our abilities to practically apply that. I'd suggest that if you're claiming that anything is somehow fundamentally beyond any kind of study, you have a responsibility to explain why that would be, especially when it's something that you're then expecting people to accept as definition truth.

I do not expect anyone to accept my beliefs as truth, but I try to use logic to get my points across. It is not logical that according to my definition of God that God would ever be observed and studied.

So you just observing and inquire about the information in those messengers words then?

You are still stuck on the blocker that there is something unique and special about your belief alone that means fundamental rules of logic and reality somehow don't apply to them. The irony is, of course, that you are far from alone in this.

Everything in this physical world is subject to the rules of logic but the rules of logic do not apply to God. God is and has always been immensely exalted beyond all that can ever be recounted or perceived, everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men. Such an entity can never be subject to human logic and it would be illogical to think so. It is absurd to expect to be able to encapsulate an infinite God with the finite human mind. Of course, it helps to have a definition of God before we discuss God, so maybe it is best at this juncture to post you the definition of God according to my beliefs:

God in the Baháʼí Faith

 

[Yerda]

We are not God's children. God does not have children.
Aside from that, God has not ignored us.

You won't find God unless you look for Him, because God does not come running after anyone.
But that is your choice whether or not you want to look or not.

“If a man were to declare, ‘There is a lamp in the next room which gives no light’, one hearer might be satisfied with his report, but a wiser man goes into the room to judge for himself, and behold, when he finds the light shining brilliantly in the lamp, he knows the truth!” Paris Talks, p. 103

Well, if I'm honest I have looked. What I found was that there are lots of other ideas about gods and divinity and the one in the Bible is the least interesting and most distasteful, to me.

I genuinely hope that your religious path brings you whatever it is you seek. Take care.

 

[Trailblazer]

Great, another religious plan for world peace, we know how they work out.

No, we do not know how they will work out until they have had a chance to work out....

To say that the Baha'i Faith plan for world peace will never work out just because other religions had pans that did not work out is the fallacy of hasty generalization...

Besides, what actual plans did any other religion have? They might have promised world peace but they have no plans to bring it to fruition as the Baha'i Faith has.