That's a "no". You are not willing to do the same thing you're asking other people to do.
Sorry, I meant to say: “I would be willing to look for information that may contradict my beliefs, if I believed that information came from God.” I was having an emergency last night so that was a typo I did not see.
I don’t know if that correction makes any difference.
What did you think I am asking other people to do?
But you also agreed with me when I said God can't have any wants. You are making directly contradictory statements in this thread.
Again, I say that it is logically impossible for an omnipotent and omniscient god to want anything. The entire concept of wanting simply makes no sense in that context. Now, if you are proposing a god who is both omnipotent and omniscient but also proposing that god could even possibly want anything, you can not agree with my previous statement. They are directly contradictory. You need to address that contradiction in your own statements here.
You need to understand what I meant by what I said. God cannot have any
wants for Himself because God does not want anything for Himself since God is wholly self-sufficient. However, God wants things for humans.
So I agree that it is logically impossible for an omnipotent and omniscient God to want anything
for Himself but that does not preclude God wanting things for humans.
“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
As an aside, I know an atheist says that if God exists God would WANT everyone to believe that He exists, and actually that is what precipitated my OP questions about whether God would communicate directly to everyone or prove that He exists to everyone, if God exists. For years I have been telling this atheist that it is illogical for God cannot want anything for Himself, although God might want humans to believe that He exists for their own benefit.
That is a politicians answer. I didn't ask you what the reason is not, I asked you want the reason is. Why are you unwilling or unable to answer that simple question?
Sorry I got off track. It was not deliberate but my thinking can be tangential. Baha’u’llah did not put effort into convincing people that God exists. All He did was garner a few disciples and complete His God-given mission, including writing scriptures. Those disciples were already believers, as they were formerly Babis (followers of the Bab), and before that they had been Muslims.
As for me, I do not put any effort into
convincing people that God exists as I have no desire to convince anyone of that. It might look like that since I talk so much about God, but my motive is not to convince anyone that God exists, I am just sharing what I believe bout God.
Baha’u’llah wrote:
“For the faith of no man can be conditioned by any one except himself.” Gleanings, p. 143
That means that everyone has to decide for themselves what to believe. If I succeeded in convincing you I would be conditioning your faith, and I don't want to do that.
Generalised as in Bahai (or indeed any other formal religion). I'd be more interested in what you actually think rather than what some scriptures are telling you to believe.
Unfortunately it if difficult to separate the two because what I think is influenced by the scriptures but if you ask me something specific I will try to tell you what I think in my own words.
This is basic scientific process that can be and has been applied countless times for hundreds of years. There is nothing different about doing it in relation to the existence of gods and anything else.
Okay, but I am not scientifically inclined so I do not know what you know. I studied geography and psychology in college, not hard science.
How can you claim to know it can't be tested if you don't even know it exists? Remember about using the correct words here; if this is something you just believe, you should say so rather than claiming to know.
I did not say that I do not know that the soul exists, I said that the soul can never be proven to exist. I believe the soul exists but the soul is immaterial and its nature is a mystery so it cannot be tested as in a science experiment.
You literally were! I asked you what about religion makes you believe it immune to science and you gave the soul as an example.
The soul was just one example. Do you want some other examples? How about the spiritual world (heaven), do you think that is within the reach of science? Tell me of something religious that you think can be studied by science.
I do not want to get off track again, but Baha’is believe that both religion and science are vitally important for human progress and they are like two wings of one bird, both necessary for humanity to advance. However, they deal with different aspects of life. Science deals with improving our physical lives in the material world and religion deals with moral and spiritual development and the life beyond this world.
"The gods live in a city at the top of Mount Olympus"
"The Sun is carried by the Sun Gods chariot across the sky"
"Our monks can live with no food or water"
I could go on, especially if I'm can make up my own.
Note that they don't have to be disprovable to support my point, merely testable.
Yes, you could test those but those were not the kind of religious beliefs I was thinking of. You could prove those are false pretty easily, but just try proving the soul or God are true or false using science.
You say that a lot but you've never even tried to explain it. Would you try? Maybe start with the definitions of "fact", "knowledge" and "belief" and how they fit with your statements?
Since I say I know, I can start with a definition of
know and go on from there.
Know:
to have information in your mind; to be aware of something: know
I have information in my mind about God and I am aware that God exists
Here are some other definitions:
3 Ways to Know Something
There are 3 main ways.
1. Experiential (Empirical)
With experiential, you know something because you’ve “experienced” it – basically through your five senses (site, hearing, touch, smell, and taste.)
2. Cognitive (Rational)
With cognitive, you know something because you’ve thought your way through it, argued it, or rationalized it.
3. Constructed (Creational)
With constructed, you know something because you created it – and it may be subjective instead of objective and it may be based on convention or perception.
3 Ways to Know Something
The way I know that God exists is not Experiential or Constructed, it is Cognitive (Rational) since I have thought my way through it, argued it, or rationalized it.
I cannot prove my beliefs are true and that is why they are called beliefs rather than facts. However, a person can
know that their beliefs are true, in the ways I explained above.
Belief is the state of
mind in which a person thinks something to be the case, with or without there being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainty.
Belief - Wikipedia
Fact something that is
known to have
happened or to
exist,
especially something for which
proof exists, or about which there is
information:
fact
But that would mean neither or us couldn't use logic in relation to our discussions about the nature and existence of God (including stating whether God is subject to logic or not!). We couldn't say anything definitive about God at all because everything was say is rooted in logic.
You can certainly use logic in discussing God and you have already done so, when you ‘reasoned’ why an omnipotent and omniscient God cannot have any wants or needs. That is logical reasoning.
Omnipotence and omniscience are attributes if God so you can subject those attributes to logical reasoning, as you have already done. However, the Essence (intrinsic nature) of God is not subject to logic because it is far beyond human understanding so it can never be known. How can we reason about something that can never be known?
