Atheists: If God existed would God……

[Trailblazer]

A rather inane argument, since you are now trying to compare "finding evidence for future events" with "finding evidence for claims of existential truths." Really, you've got to do better than that.

There is evidence for claims of Baha'u'llah, but there is no proof.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you CLAIM to "know it" from reading the "scriptures"? And of course, you KNOW who WROTE those scriptures, don't you?.....you DO, don't you?

I know who wrote the Baha'i scriptures, the Bab and Baha'u'llah.
We have the original scriptures to prove that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Really? So IF there actually IS this "evidence" that you speak so highly of, then you wouldn't NEED "faith" to believe what is being claimed, right? It would BE FACTUAL TRUTH!~

Evidence is not factual proof.

 

[ACEofALLaces]

God does not write scriptures, God has other things to do, like ruling and maintaining the universe.

Yeah, OTHER things, like eating peanuts, pealing bananas, sniffing burnt goat hair. "Ain't got no time to be writing scriptures.....I gots dem goat-ropers and sheep-herders to do dat FER me!" <quote unquote God>

There is no proof but there is evidence, although evidence to one is not evidence to another.

Oh SURE....that's REALLY convenient, ain't it?

I never said that simply because I accept it as "evidence" that makes it suitable and acceptable for anyone else.

Oh but you HAVE come across like that on a number of occasions, from what I have read.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is the problem and a pity. Do you think that there are no other sources of knowledge?

No, there aren't any other sources of knowledge about God

That is exactly what the atheists are asking you all this time. What evidence?

Asked and answered.

 

[ACEofALLaces]

I know who wrote the Baha'i scriptures, the Bab and Baha'u'llah.
We have the original scriptures to prove that.

No, all you have are CLAIMS that Babs and Baha'u'llah wrote them. Granted, they (probably) wrote some of their OWN scriptures, but not necessarily the ones which you oftentimes refer to. And even if Babs and Baha'u'llah DID write some scriptures, this is where the breakdown in supportive evidence comes into play, that they are direct FROM GOD, as there IS none!....other THAN their claims.

 

[Trailblazer]

At YOUR insistence I HAVE looked into this "evidence" you claim that you have....and all I can find is that which supports the actual EXISTENCE of one called Baha’u’llah, and some interesting items regarding his lifes ambitions, trials and tribulations. NOTHING, however to support the claims that HE was receiving information DIRECTLY FROM GOD.....other than his sayso.

It can never be proven that any Messenger got anything directly from God, for obvious logical reasons.

It is sad, really sad, that nobody here has any logical abilities. Like little children, they want what they can never have, Proof that God spoke to the Messenger; but there is no Proof, only evidence, and since they do not like the evidence why not take their toys and go home?

 

[Trailblazer]

No, all you have are CLAIMS that Babs and Baha'u'llah wrote them.

No, we know that they wrote them because they were stamped with their original seals and verified by modern methods of handwriting analysis... Why not just quit while you are ahead?

 

[Trailblazer]

that they are direct FROM GOD, as there IS none!....other THAN their claims.

I never claimed that there was evidence of that, so why do people keep asking me for evidence.

 

[ACEofALLaces]

It can never be proven that any Messenger got anything directly from God, for obvious logical reasons.

It is sad, really sad, that nobody here has any logical abilities. Like little children, they want what they can never have, Proof that God spoke to the Messenger; but there is no Proof, only evidence, and since they do not like the evidence why not take their toys and go home?

Mostly, at least from MY vantage point, is the need to challenge YOUR claims that God really DID speak to these 'so-called' messengers. You EXPECT people like me, just for example, to accept those claims simply because it CAN be proven that some dude named Baha'u'llah actually DID exist.

But it CANNOT be proven that this Baha'u'llah EVER actually received ANYTHING from God......because, of what YOU say so matter of factly "for obvious logical reasons"......I guess like he didn't really do it, and that God never did it....THAT kind of "obvious logical reasons", right?

 

[Trailblazer]

Then go ahead. Those problems have been standing for about 26 centuries. If you have a convincing answer to them present them.

I doubt I will have any answers that are acceptable to you but I will get back to you on that later, if I ever dig my way our from under all these posts.

 

[ACEofALLaces]

No, we know that they wrote them because they were stamped with their original seals and verified by modern methods of handwriting analysis... Why not just quit while you are ahead?

Once AGAIN.....ALL you have established is that it is certainly within the realm of possibility that Babs and Baha'u'llah wrote some stuff down......and NOT that any of it actually emanated FROM GOD!
This sort of thing is WHY I am ahead...and why YOU are losing. Give me something more than simply that Baha'u'llah was a nice guy on a mission, and THEN we MIGHT get somewhere.

 

[Trailblazer]

THAT is nothing but a bald-faced LIE! I dismiss your claims regarding your "messenger", simply because the evidence that you provide, does NOT particularly support the claims that he was receiving messages DIRECTLY FROM GOD.

I said "This is what atheists do when they dismiss Messengers if God just because they don't like them." I was not referring to you. I know why you dismiss the claims.

Why would an "atheist" dismiss that sort of claim, simply because the atheist just doesn't LIKE the idea of there being such a "messenger". You are making it SOUND as though atheists are just a bunch of wishy-washy people who simply don't LIKE stuff, and therefore reject it out of hand for no particular reason, just like that!

If you do not know that atheists simply dismiss Messengers because they don't LIKE the idea of there being such a "messenger" that is because you do not read much of what gets posted on this forum.

Most atheists absolutely reject any claims of any Messenger out of hand, although there are a few exceptions....

Many atheists don't like the IDEA of Messengers because they want a direct message form God, as if they are soooooooooo important that the Almighty God should speak to them directly. It is sickening that anyone could be so full of themselves.

 

[Trailblazer]

Mostly, at least from MY vantage point, is the need to challenge YOUR claims that God really DID speak to these 'so-called' messengers. You EXPECT people like me, just for example, to accept those claims simply because it CAN be proven that some dude named Baha'u'llah actually DID exist.

That is a straw man because I do not expect you or anyone else to believe what I believe.
I have REASONS to believe what I believe and since you do not have those reasons you are not going to believe what I believe.

But it CANNOT be proven that this Baha'u'llah EVER actually received ANYTHING from God......because, of what YOU say so matter of factly "for obvious logical reasons"......I guess like he didn't really do it, and that God never did it....THAT kind of "obvious logical reasons", right?

No,not that kind of logical reason...
Use your logical mind and ask yourself how it could ever be proven that any Messenger ever got messages from God. God cannot be proven to exist so how could it ever be proven that any Messenger got messages from God?

It cannot be proven, so all we can do is work backwards.... We look at the Messenger and determine if there is a REASON to believe that He was telling the truth about getting those messages from God.

 

[Trailblazer]

Once AGAIN.....ALL you have established is that it is certainly within the realm of possibility that Babs and Baha'u'llah wrote some stuff down......and NOT that any of it actually emanated FROM GOD!
This sort of thing is WHY I am ahead...and why YOU are losing. Give me something more than simply that Baha'u'llah was a nice guy on a mission, and THEN we MIGHT get somewhere.

I am not losing a damn thing because I KNOW that the messages came from God.

There is a LOT more than that Baha'u'llah was a nice guy on a mission, but I am not going to give it to you. If you consider it important enough then you would have to go looking for it yourself. All of the information is readily available on the internet.

 

[F1fan]

I believe it is true because I believe that whatever Baha’u’llah wrote is true.

And you could be mistaken. We are asking for facts and a lucid argument, not your personal endorsement. All you offer is useless endorsement. Not good enough for debate.

This has nothing to do with power. Just because God is all-powerful that doesn’t mean that God is obligated to hop to and do everything that humans expect Him to do. Moreover, I am not God’s manager so I don’t know why He chooses to guide some people and not others; unless it is written in scriptures I cannot know why.

But you don't know if a God exists, or it has any power if it does.

From my perspective God can never be ‘at fault’ since God can never make any mistakes since God is infallible, and that means that even if I do not like something I try to accept it as God’s will, knowing that God knows more than I do about what is best for me.

So you are God's representative, but can't even show it exists. So you might as well be God.

I am not adjusting anything, I am just responding to posts with what I believe. Even though I sometimes question if God is all-loving and wonder why God allows so much suffering, that does not mean I can just stop believing that God exists. Whether God exists or not is not contingent upon His characteristics or whether I like them.

But we don't care what you believe. We care about if WHAT you believe is factual and rational. You offer no facts, nor any substantive argument. You only tell us your beliefs as if they are fact. Or as if you are somehow infallible.

I believe that God is responsible for everything in existence, but all living things evolved over time.

Thus God is responsible for everything. That means evolution. That means diseases. That means cancers. That means the people who wage war. The buck stops at your God. So if you worship your God you also worship every evil person it created through time.

I never said that God does not care about us, I only ever said that apparently God does not care if people suffer. Those are two different statements.

So you care about your family but you don't care if they suffer? So if your mother has cancer and suffer agonizing pain you don't care?

You care about the cancer, but not her suffering from cancer, is that what you are suggesting about your God? If not, then clarify how it doesn't care about your suffering but cares about you.

 

[F1fan]

For starters, I know God is immaterial and as such God cannot ever be seen.

So you're claiming you are absolutely certain a God exists as a fact. Explain how you know this.

 

[F1fan]

Really? So IF there actually IS this "evidence" that you speak so highly of, then you wouldn't NEED "faith" to believe what is being claimed, right? It would BE FACTUAL TRUTH!~

Tb will admit she doesn't have facts and knowledge of a God, but will then write a post that asserts factual things about God.

"I don't know if God exists, but he has long, white flowing hair, and a penis. But you can't see the penis because that's obscene, and it's invisible, along with the rest of God."

 

[epronovost]

We look at the Messenger and determine if there is a REASON to believe that He was telling the truth about getting those messages from God.

What could that possibly be?

For something to be reasonable it has to be supported by independently verifiable evidence and logically sound. At the very least to reasonably believe something without verifiable evidence, one must at the very least be able to make a strong probabilistic argument, but getting messages from God is basically a miracle and thus totally improbable, a rare, if not unique type of occurrence.

 

[Trailblazer]

What could that possibly be?

For something to be reasonable it has to be supported by independently verifiable evidence and logically sound. At the very least to reasonably believe something without verifiable evidence, one must at the very least be able to make a strong probabilistic argument, but getting messages from God is basically a miracle and thus totally improbable, a rare, if not unique type of occurrence.

What would constitute a strong probabilistic argument for you?