Atheists: If God existed would God……

[Daniel Nicholson]

That is much too general. God has done lots of things. Could you be more specific?

The same applies to the future. God has willed many things for humans and I can only tell you very generally what I believe God's purpose is for humans.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it............” The Promised Day is Come, p. 116

Read more: God’s Purpose

Okay, now we are getting somewhere.
All the stuff that Baha'is believe, the stuff you think is true and is based on reality, all the things Baha'u'llah said that were supposedly coming from God, can not be verified. Personally, I think it's all bull****. It's some guy telling a story and saying he's talking to God. I think it's way more likely that he is making up a story than he is actually talking to God.

So when I see this kind of thing, I go right past it. No thank you. BUT you are asking me what kind of evidence would I need to believe this story. And my answer is, literally anything that shows he was talking to God. If you say that there is no evidence, you just have to believe, than you a very gullible and are probably getting scammed.

 

[CG Didymus]

Thank you! This makes so much sense of so much. I read somewhere that Tb said she is here to teach. Is this true, Tb?

Thanks. It's always good to hear from you. I'm glad I said something that helped.

 

[Trailblazer]

Okay, now we are getting somewhere.
All the stuff that Baha'is believe, the stuff you think is true and is based on reality, all the things Baha'u'llah said that were supposedly coming from God, can not be verified. Personally, I think it's all bull****. It's some guy telling a story and saying he's talking to God. I think it's way more likely that he is making up a story than he is actually talking to God.

You are free to think anything you want to think because you have free will.

So when I see this kind of thing, I go right past it. No thank you. BUT you are asking me what kind of evidence would I need to believe this story. And my answer is, literally anything that shows he was talking to God. If you say that there is no evidence, you just have to believe, than you a very gullible and are probably getting scammed.

You don't want much do you?

Sorry, there is no such evidence because God wants us to have faith in His Messenger, faith that is based upon the evidence the Messenger provided.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

God rewards those who earnestly seek Him through the Messenger but God will not force anyone to accept the evidence. That is a choice.

 

[CG Didymus]

All of the conversations that I have walked away from having a lot to think on, are the conversations where my interlocutor was willing to and eager to reflect on their own beliefs.

I don't get much of a sense of willing introspection from the Baha'i posters.

Yeah, I've accused them of being no different than Fundamental Christians. Who proudly say, "The Bible says it. I believe it. And that settles it." There are very liberal Baha'is that do respect people and their beliefs without acting as if their, the Baha'i, beliefs are superior. But the Baha'is I hung out with, back in the hippie days, were more into promoting peace rather than trying to get people to believe in God and the Baha'i prophet.

I just remembered a funny story about that. These hippie friends used to gather by Sedona, Arizona during full moons. Another time at Mt. Shasta in California. People believed all sorts of things, the peyote religion and all kinds of Eastern religions and philosophies and things. I invited my Baha'i friends to go. They couldn't make, but they got two other Baha'is to go. The gathering was a mile hike down into Sycamore Creek canyon. They came dressed like they were going to some meeting in a city. Everyone else had very hippie kind of clothes. And at the swimming hole, nobody had clothes.

They came in all slicked up, looking clean and respectable. They brought tracks that had the basic teachings about the Baha'i Faith. Fortunately, they didn't start handing them out. And I was surprised, but happy when they went "native". After that, they fit in perfect. Everybody held hands around a campfire that night and chanted "Om". Nobody preached a thing. You could see it and feel it that everyone there accepted everyone.

Oh, and one of the older people there, kind of a spiritual leader. A year or two later became a Baha'i. While meditating, she says Baha'u'llah spoke to her. Which, if true, blows the whole thing about God not being able to communicate to individuals. But she wasn't the only one. I knew a few Baha'is that say they were visited by Abdul Baha' in visions and dreams. But who knows if it was just their imagination?

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

The attack is how you are told that your answers are insufficiently accurate, including inconsistency, poor definitions, logical fallacies, evasion, etc.

More broad brush judgments about theist behaviors, judgments that you say you do not make. It is constant, and it mainly comes from you, not the other atheists. Why do you have to knock theists down in order to make your points? That is a question only you can answer.

I understand you don't like the criticisms, but that is part of religious debate.

I do not like them? You read me totally wrong. Everything you say about me is like water off a duck's back since I know it is not true.

I am not in a debate with you or any other atheists. I am just trying to have friendly discussions.
It is impossible to have a discussion with you because of your relentless criticisms.

Matthew 7:3-5 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

44. O Companion of My Throne!
Hear no evil, and see no evil, abase not thyself, neither sigh and weep. Speak no evil, that thou mayest not hear it spoken unto thee, and magnify not the faults of others that thine own faults may not appear great; and wish not the abasement of anyone, that thine own abasement be not exposed. Live then the days of thy life, that are less than a fleeting moment, with thy mind stainless, thy heart unsullied, thy thoughts pure, and thy nature sanctified, so that, free and content, thou mayest put away this mortal frame, and repair unto the mystic paradise and abide in the eternal kingdom forevermore. The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

So since you realize that there is nothing more to be said.
Nothing that I have is ever going to be convincing to you.

People with credible arguments are convincing.

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

I have told you time and again that I am not trying to convince anyone that my beliefs are true.
You want to be convinced, that is what is really going on, but I am not out to convince you.

Convince thinkers is true? In other words, theists are not thinkers, only atheists can think.
You sure think highly of yourself.

 

[CG Didymus]

Any religion that promises world peace is a relligion I would stay away from. Putting people in jail at a higher rate is not my idea of world peace.

Here's a few Baha'i quotes...

The law of Baha’u’llah prescribes the death penalty for murder and arson, with the alternative of life imprisonment. – The Most Holy Book, p. 204.

…should anyone deliberately take another’s life, him also shall ye put to death. … Should ye condemn the arsonist and the murderer to life imprisonment, it would be permissible according to the provisions of the Book. – Baha’u’llah, The Most Holy Book, pp. 203-204.

71. on the third offense, place ye a mark upon his brow so that, thus identified, he may not be accepted in the cities of God and His countries ¶45

The mark to be placed on the thief’s forehead serves the purpose of warning people of his proclivities. All details concerning the nature of the mark, how the mark is to be applied, how long it must be worn, on what conditions it may be removed, as well as the seriousness of various degrees of theft have been left by Bahá’u’lláh for the Universal House of Justice to determine when the law is applied.

In 1985, the Universal House of Justice addressed a message to the peoples of the world inviting them to consider that a new social order can be fostered by all peoples’ seeing themselves as members of one universal family. This message was presented to world leaders and countless others during the United Nations International Year of Peace.

The Promise of World Peace can be read in full at the Bahá’í Reference Library.
​

I think the Baha'i Faith is setting itself up to govern the world.

 

[lukethethird]

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.

Great, religious lunatics wanting to rule the world with promises of peace. Just what the world needs.

 

[lukethethird]

Here's a few Baha'i quotes...

The law of Baha’u’llah prescribes the death penalty for murder and arson, with the alternative of life imprisonment. – The Most Holy Book, p. 204.

…should anyone deliberately take another’s life, him also shall ye put to death. … Should ye condemn the arsonist and the murderer to life imprisonment, it would be permissible according to the provisions of the Book. – Baha’u’llah, The Most Holy Book, pp. 203-204.

71. on the third offense, place ye a mark upon his brow so that, thus identified, he may not be accepted in the cities of God and His countries ¶45

The mark to be placed on the thief’s forehead serves the purpose of warning people of his proclivities. All details concerning the nature of the mark, how the mark is to be applied, how long it must be worn, on what conditions it may be removed, as well as the seriousness of various degrees of theft have been left by Bahá’u’lláh for the Universal House of Justice to determine when the law is applied.

In 1985, the Universal House of Justice addressed a message to the peoples of the world inviting them to consider that a new social order can be fostered by all peoples’ seeing themselves as members of one universal family. This message was presented to world leaders and countless others during the United Nations International Year of Peace.

The Promise of World Peace can be read in full at the Bahá’í Reference Library.
​

I think the Baha'i Faith is setting itself up to govern the world.

Sounds like lunacy.

 

[Trailblazer]

Great, religious lunatics wanting to rule the world with promises of peace. Just what the world needs.

No, Baha'is are not out to rule the world in spite of what some people are saying on this thread.
Do you believe everything other people say? I don't. I investigate for myself.

 

[Trailblazer]

Sounds like lunacy.

No, it is called justice.

 

[viole]

Jesus had the answer as to how I would know you are not a true Messenger. Have you done what the Messengers have done?

Matthew 7:15-20 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Fruits: the pleasant or successful result of work or actions: fruit

Don't you realise that is circular reasoning?

Suppose, I invert what Jesus said. That, for instance, prophets who bringeth evil fruits are the true messenger of God. The ones who bringeth good fruits are false prophets. For God likes to bring discord to the world.

How would you know that I am a false prophet, if I in-fact bring evil fruits, without making a-priori assumption of some of God's property? Namely, the moral stature of the messengers He chooses? Or His true intentions?

IOW: how could any messenger tell you anything logically reliable about God, if you do not already sort of believe that already?

Ciao

- viole

 

[joelr]

I don't know what God cares about, only God knows that. God may or may not care but humans choosing the wrong religion and humans fighting over religion is not God's responsibility...

"The purpose of creation is for the created to have the capacity to know and love its creator"
"God communicates his will and purpose to humanity through intermediaries, known as Manifestations of God, "

Your theology doesn't bear out the apologetics you just came up with. To communicate such a poor message, incorrect science, zero new philosophy, poor literary form, obvious riffing off Islam is just way too clearly a work. Like Muhammad this is just another human claiming to be getting messages from a God. In your faith God wants humanity to be educated so he clearly does care. Bahai expected the entire world to buy into this religion. Unlike the Gospel writers who were trained in the Greek school of writing fiction this writer was not.

The real God already cleared all this up when He sent Baha'u'llah as His Representative.
God sent Baha'u'llah to explain the religion is One and end the fighting but if people choose to reject Baha'u'llah that is their choice. They will just have to continue fighting over religion until they wake up and smell the coffee, if they ever do.

No, a guy wrote some stuff. Seriously why do you think people would care about a person claiming to have God messages when we see this on a daily basis? Then your advise is "wake up"?? NO. What happens is a real God shows up and writes things that a human could not possibly know. He gives actual precise accurate descriptions of the future, he gives cures to many diseases, explains new theories in science that turn out to be real and advance out knowledge. Something that doesn't look like a guy who writes all day long, is taking already known concepts and re-hashing them and trying to claim all religions are true for the time (that makes no sense). This is material written by a person. There is not one line that a human couldn't easily write for themselves.

People don't stop religious wars for a messenger who looks like a crank. There is no way an actual God would be this lame.

 

[Trailblazer]

Don't you realise that is circular reasoning?

Suppose, I invert what Jesus said. That, for instance, prophets who bringeth evil fruits are the true messenger of God. The ones who bringeth good fruits are false prophets. For God likes to bring discord to the world.

How would you know that I am a false prophet, if I in-fact bring evil fruits, without making a-priori assumption of some of God's property? Namely, the moral stature of the messengers He chooses? Or His true intentions?

IOW: how could any messenger tell you anything logically reliable about God, if you do not already sort of believe that already?

Ciao

- viole

No, it is not circular reasoning because the fruits are not the Prophet. The fruits are how you know if a Prophet is a true Prophet.

You are not supposed to assume they are true Prophets before you look at their fruits

Would it be circular reasoning if you said you are voting for a candidate for president who had a good track record? How else would you know that he would make a good president?

 

[joelr]

Baha'u'llah never spoke for or about Hinduism or Buddhism.

"There is no definitive list of Manifestations of God, but Baháʼu'lláh and ʻAbdu'l-Bahá referred to several personages as Manifestations; they include Adam, Noah, Krishna, Moses, Abraham, Zoroaster, Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad.[13] The Báb, as well as Baháʼu'lláh, were included in this definition"

He claims the teachings of each are "for that time period" and he is updating religion now. The depth of Vedantic Hindusim in philosophy and metaphysics is incredibly deep. It's still being taught today by many great teachers. The New York school has a Youtube channel with hundreds of videos. There is nothing in Bahai that comes remotely close to the richness of Vedantic thought.

 

[viole]

No, it is not circular reasoning because the fruits are not the Prophet. The fruits are how you know if a Prophet is a true Prophet.

Yes, but who said that? How do you know it's true?

Would it be circular reasoning if you said you are voting for a candidate for president who had a good track record? How else would you know that he would make a good president?

Well, it depends. If you prefer presidents that don't drink, nor smoke, nor eat any meat, you might run the risk of voting for Hitler, and leave out people like Churchill.

But that is not the point. The point is that you cannot possibly know God's intentions. For what you know, your will being is not important. By voting a president you do it so that you and others have a better life. You have control on that. But you cannot possibly have any control on God's intentions. You cannot choose God (oh, well, it seems you do, in fact).

IOW: your metaphor just shows additional evidence that believe in a God with some properties is wishful thinking not based on any logical compelling justification. You have no logical warrant to my claim: God does not like your happiness, therefore only the messengers that bring bad fruits are reliable messengers of God. You cannot possibly deny this claim without begging the question.

Ciao

- viole

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The ruling would not be the same to any logical person.

Imagine if courts would engage in verdicts that way.
Justice would be non-existent.

The hundred-dollar difference is that there is no evidence of any of those entities existing but there is evidence of God existing.

No. All of them, including gods, are supported by the exact same kind of non-evidence.

The fact that you do not LIKE the evidence does not make it non-evidence.

"liking" has nothing to do with it.
What is and isn't proper / valid evidence is not dependent on anyone's likes or personal preferences.

Instead, you like your beliefs and will accept things as evidence for it which you wouldn't even accept as evidence for other ideas that you don't have a priori beliefs in.

It's painfully obvious.

 

[joelr]

What is sad is that so many of the people here have so much knowledge and insight to share, but Baha'is would rather argue their beliefs. It's so counterproductive to their claims of being the religion destined to unite all the people of the world and establishing peace and harmony.

The scripture is very generic, it's not something that will draw people out of an established religion. Especially compared to Vedantic studies. I think if a Bahai follower began studying that school of Hinduism they would be very impressed. I think Bahai even use the reincarnation idea?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

And you really cannot see the fallacy.

Not a fallacy.

None of the things I mentioned are or can be supported by objective evidence.
And not being supported by objective evidence, doesn't mean that those things aren't real.

So yes, just as I said, you could say the exact same thing about any such thing: "just because there is no objective evidence for X, does not mean X does not exist".

You can substitute X with literally anything and the statement would be correct (and just as meaningless).

How we determine if a thing exists is by looking at all the evidence.

And you just said that there is no objective evidence.
That leaves you with subjective evidence only. Which is to say: unverifiable hearsay and anecdotes. This isn't evidence at all, as those are just claims.

Just because the same can be said about alien abductees, fairies, unicorns, all other gods I don't believe in that in NO WAY means that my God does not exist

I didn't say otherwise.
Another strawman.

There is no logical connection whatsoever.

The logical connection is that your statement was completely meaningless.
It's a useless tautology that does NOTHING to support the claim that a god (or aliens, or unicorns, or...) exist. It doesn't affect the claim "god exists" AT ALL. It doesn't affect its likelyhood, plausibility, probability,... nada.

And the same goes for ANY OTHER CLAIM of which you could say the exact same thing.
That's the logical connection.

Clearly it went over your head again.

As a simple analogy, just because there are junky cars in a junkyard that don't run that does not mean that there cannot be nice new cars in a car lot down the street.

Talk about not having logical connections...............

 

[lukethethird]

No, it is called justice.

Religious justice, like eternal punishment, no thanks.