Atheists: If God existed would God……

[TagliatelliMonster]

Like I said, ... repeating. This is what happens when one rejects the wisdom from above. They lack understanding.
I did explain.... but by all means, don't let me get in the way of your being right.


Now now. You do know what one is doing when they don't speak the truth. They are lying. That would make them a liar.
You asked me nothing.

Here In case you actually can't see your own post - one, not "every time".
You said...
_______________________________
I didn't miss any point.

Clearly the implication of your response there was that god isn't the creator of nasty desease but that humans are.

If that wasn't your point, then your post was extremely misleading at best.
I couldn't, in fact, for the life me imagine what your point instead was then.

I mean... You ARE literally saying it, after all.... Here's your post again to refresh your memory:

What this reveals, is that ills and dangers are due to activities - selfish, careless, greedy, and in some cases, ignorant activities.
So, do you still think it's strange, or does that paint a picture of how diseases are caused.
We have a lot of dirty people living, don't we... and it did not just start yesterday.
God created the people. The people... by their own choice of activities, cause the problems.


And you said that in response to someone asking that it would be strange that a creator didn't create the things that cause desease and genetic defects and alike.

In summary, your latest post here, is just dishonest backpaddling. You know, I wouldn't mind if you just honestly reflected on it and then took your words back. At least I'ld respect your honesty then.
_______________________________

If you think, and believe in all honesty, that is asking, then I really feel sorry for you.

It's implied in the sentence "if that wasn't your point, then your post was extremely misleading".
Meaning that I leave the option open that you just expressed yourself poorly.

And regardless of me asking explicitly or not, when you feel like someone didn't understand what you were trying to say - for whatever reason - the easy way out is by clarifying what you meant, instead of playing this silly game of plain denial with no further explanation whatsoever.

Why would you engage in plain denial with no further explanation?
That only stretches out the confusion. If you would have simply replied from the get-go with a clarification of your point, then there wouldn't have been a need for me to double down on it.

But alas........
I don't expect a clarification anymore.
Because I don't think there is one. If there were, you would have given it already.

However, unlike religious folks, I like to be shown wrong. So, by my guest.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is more to the story because the evidence is weak, and only will work on a mind that is biased to believe.

Furthermore, the exact same type of "evidence" will be considered very insufficient by those same people when it is presented for any other claim then the religion that is already being believed.

 

[nPeace]

My parents were nominal Catholics. One time at church I didn't put my feet on the ground because I thought a trap door would open and I slide down to hell. Another time when there were several thunderhead clouds in the sky, I looked to see if I could see the little cherub angels flying around. The church puts stuff into kid's brains. And, like I've mentioned before, Baha'is would side with Atheists about those beliefs about God that were taught at the Catholic church.

People actually think that furry little creatures are their relatives, and want to live with them.
One woman had her face ripped off by one, and that's just one of several stories.
People get their heads filled with all sorts of stuff.
We don't have to believe everything we hear, but I think it's both important, and beneficial to search for truthful answers in the right place.
Where do you think we can find those answers?

 

[nPeace]

It's implied in the sentence "if that wasn't your point, then your post was extremely misleading".
Meaning that I leave the option open that you just expressed yourself poorly.

And regardless of me asking explicitly or not, when you feel like someone didn't understand what you were trying to say - for whatever reason - the easy way out is by clarifying what you meant, instead of playing this silly game of plain denial with no further explanation whatsoever.

Why would you engage in plain denial with no further explanation?
That only stretches out the confusion. If you would have simply replied from the get-go with a clarification of your point, then there wouldn't have been a need for me to double down on it.

But alas........
I don't expect a clarification anymore.
Because I don't think there is one. If there were, you would have given it already.

However, unlike religious folks, I like to be shown wrong. So, by my guest.

Like I said before, attitude makes the difference.
Striking a dead horse repeatedly, will not make it get up.
Some people's head have swollen so large, their eyes are practically closed, and they don't try to reverse that situation.
For those persons to see, they must first recognize where the problem lies.

You accuse people of your own failings.

You accuse them of being condescending, when almost every post you make are full of and unnecessary snide remarks... among other things.

You expect them to be respond in the way you want - apologetic, but you are never apologetic - just the opposite... accusing them wrongfully, and then sticking out that you are right.

I got no time for games Tag... nor monsters.
I avoid wasting time on particular posters. Especially when they run away, and claim they got bored after two posts, and return later when they think they can just waste your time with meaningless talk.

I'd rather not spend much finger tapping time there Tag.
Why should I, when the person is only listening to themselves.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Is God impatient to see some return to him? Explain.

We are the ones who are impatient..
No matter what question you ask about why G-d allows evil, the answer is the same.
1. He has given us sovereignty over ourselves.
2. This world is imperfect, mortal

You judge everything by life and death, and not by eternity.
What about eternal justice, do you not understand?
When it is time for somebody to die, they die .. whether it be in the womb, or 900 years old. Compared to eternity, it is as a blink of an eye.

 

[nPeace]

And still no clarification...........................................

Given.

 

[muhammad_isa]

So who has the truth? Christians, Muslims or Baha'is?

You're still doing it..
Do you want me to tell you "A" or "B" or "neither"?

Let me ask you this .. do you think that "Trump" can tell you the answer to your question?

G-d is looking at our hearts, and not our brains.
You probably don't think that you need G-d.
You can manage alright as you are .. right?

Faith is not about intellectual games.
Those that truly seek G-d will find out. G-d is closer to you than your jugular vein. The more you love G-d, the closer to the truth you will get.
It is impossible to know everything there is to know.
This life is a spiritual journey. We are the ones that stunt that growth, by clinging on to beliefs that suit us etc.
There is no "book answer". One cannot get close to G-d through academic study, although knowledge makes our faith stronger.
Academic study without faith is useless.

 

[nPeace]

So who has the truth? Christians, Muslims or Baha'is? Each does have a different take on it. But we are talking about the truth about God and the truth to who his true messengers are. If religious people can't agree, then why expect Atheists to believe anybody from any of those religions? They all believe something different.

Okay. So I was on point.
So CG, if scientists cannot agree, even about evolution, why should anyone believe it, or anything else they believe, for that matter?

 

[Sheldon]

Logically speaking, there can only be one true God who created the universe because an omnipotent/omniscient God does not need any helpers.

That's not logic, in fact it involves a begging the question fallacy, ipso facto it is irrational by definition. Can you spot where you used the fallacy yet?

 

[Sheldon]

G-d is looking at our hearts, and not our brains.

Why would it want to examine a pump made of muscle and filled with blood?

Faith is not about intellectual games.

I agree, faith is an a priori bias, that is used in place objective evidence.

Those that truly seek G-d will find out.

That is a no true Scotsman fallacy, quite a popular one among religious apologists, though tellingly it is used by apologists who reach wildly different conclusions.

We are the ones that stunt that growth, by clinging on to beliefs that suit us etc.

Another no true Scotsman fallacy, one can picture the Venn diagram with everyone who shares your beliefs and conclusions in the "un-stunted growth" group.

There is no "book answer".

Does that include the Quran? Selection bias.....

One cannot get close to G-d through academic study,

That would be true of anything thing that has no basis in fact.

knowledge makes our faith stronger.

That's odd, you just claimed (above) that faith is not about intellectual games, now knowledge makes it stronger, you seem to be spinning vapid contradictory platitudes.

Academic study without faith is useless.

Religious faith is defined as "strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof." so your claim is another absurd no true Scotsman fallacy that neatly categorises everyone who doesn't share your faith into a sub group whose academia is "useless". Oddly though we know that atheism is much more prevalent among scientists, and vastly higher again among elite scientists, so it appears you are very wrong.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Why would it want to examine a pump made of muscle and filled with blood?

I find it hard to believe that an RF poster does not understand the use of the word 'heart' in the context of faith.

It merely shows your pedantic attitude of dismissing emotion as purely physical, and make yourself out to be a 'biological robot' that is flawed in thinking by its biology.

 

[samtonga43]

The hundred-dollar difference is that the others have sought me out in order to have a dialogue.

Sorry, you may be right, but I’m seeing posters trying to show you where your statements are irrational and why they are irrational.

not to criticize me constantly. You do nothing else. You look for posts that I post to other people and use them to launch another personal attack on me. You fool nobody as you are as clear as glass right after the window washer has come..

I don’t know you, Tb. And I am not attacking you. I disagree with much of what you say is logical, and I tell you why I disagree. This is not an attack.

All the evidence is all on this thread and the many other threads I have started.

I state my reasons for disagreeing with your idea of what is logical and what is not. This is not evidence that I follow you around to ‘attack’ you. You have created a strawman in your mind.

You should be embarrassed by your behavior but instead you just keep coming at me with your relentless criticisms couched in subterfuge, but you are fooling nobody as everyone can see right through you.

How do you know that everyone can “see right through me?” Could this be a false assumption applied with a broad brush (‘everyone’)?

 

[samtonga43]

Yet one more example of your obsession with me and how you bandy up with atheists.

I thought that what this poster’s remarks were quite illuminating, and I said so. It is illogical to assume that I am therefore obsessed with you and ‘bandying up with atheists’.

Do you really think that atheists are so stupid that they cannot see what you are doing?
No, atheists are very intelligent..

All atheists?
But when I was an atheist, I was an intelligent one. I am now a Christian, and an intelligent one.

Do you have any other reason to be on this thread, like engaging in an actual dialogue?
No, you are just looking for posts so you can launch another personal attack against me...

Pointing out where I believe you are going wrong is not a personal attack, Tb.

 

[KWED]

I would not go so far as to say that it is entirely likely but it is possible, if no God exists.

If god does not exist, it is absolutely certain that god was not involved in the formation of the universe.

The answer to that is simple yet complex. Different versions of God were revealed through different Messengers of God in different ages, and how God was depicted in every age was according to the ability of people living in those ages to understand God. Before Abraham, humans were unable to grasp the concept that God is One, so they believed in many Gods.

Also, the older scriptures are not entirely accurate since that were not written by a Messenger of God; they were written by men who did not even know the Messengers of God personally, and much of what is in those scriptures was handed down by oral tradition, so it is not straight from the horse's mouth so to speak.

On top of that, the older scriptures have been misinterpreted by the religious believers and their religious leaders; so for example most Christians believe that God is a Triune God. The Jews and the Muslims and the Baha'is all believe in the one true God and He is depicted similarly in all our respective scriptures and non-Trinitarian Christians also believe in the one true God.

So basically... "My version is right and they are all wrong". Which is coincidentally what they all say about your version, with similar conviction.
And we're back to square one.

 

[KWED]

I have no desire to convince you or anyone else.

You seem to spend rather a lot of time here trying to convince people.

Baha'u'llah wrote:
“For the faith of no man can be conditioned by any one except himself.”Gleanings, p. 143

So you do not refer to holy texts or the sayings of "messengers"?

 

[KWED]

As I said, God does not communicate directly to ordinary humans because they could never understand God if God communicated to them directly. Only God's chosen Messengers can understand God speaking through the Holy Spirit and they can understand God because they have a divine mind.

God has made his existence known to a select few (who I refer to as Messengers of God) and they have made God known to everyone who recognizes them and believes what they revealed.

I believe that all of the Messengers of God were sent by God so there is no "right one." However, each Messenger brings a particular message for the age in which He appears and His message pertains to that age. After that age has ended God sends another Messenger and his message pertains to that age. The message that was brought in a past age is not pertinent to the age we are living in now, nor will the message for this age be pertinent in a subsequent age.

“The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and center your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 213

So IOW - "The claims made by my religion are true but the claims made by others are not".

Remember I said this was not an acceptable argument because every religion uses an exact copy, with the same conviction.
What makes your claim different to the others? (Remember, this needs to be more than simply "but my religion's claims are true!" You need something that is supported by more than just your own faith)

 

[KWED]

Daniel Nicholson said:
Epic Fail. As I said before, God could easily, directly or indirectly, end the fighting, but He does not.

Trailblazer said:
God could do that if He wanted to but God sent Baha'u'llah to do that because that is what God wanted to do.
An Omnipotent God only does what He wants to do, not what humans want Him to do.

I do not buy that analogy. It is the fallacy of false equivalence because you are comparing two different groups of humans, police and a Boy Scout, to God and a Messenger of God. God is not equivalent to any man, not even to a Messenger of God

The analogy works because it is comparing like for like. Two groups with authority and ability to stop the fighting vs two groups without the authority or ability to stop the fighting.

and God does not descend to earth and play Superman.

I don't know what normal people you are referring to but anyone who knows who God is would never expect God to come down to earth to play Superman. Any Christian knows that Jesus acted on God's behalf as God's Representative on earth and the same applies to Baha'u'llah and the other Messengers of God.

Really? Most peoples idea of god is precisely the superhuman being who can do anything. Religious texts are full of examples of god intervening in human affairs with miraculous acts.

 

[KWED]

God sends Messengers.

And the police send Boy Scouts.
Neither is the best use of resources or abilities.

 

[KWED]

Stupid question .. G-d created everything, and we all have to die and return to Him.
That includes you, Presidents, and of course .. me.

@Policy was referring to the Baha'i god who apparently does not/ can not interfere in human affairs.
The god of Islam, of course, absolutely interferes in human affairs. He determines the outcome of all affairs by his decree. If there is violent conflict in the world (which was the initial point) it is because Allah has decreed that there will be violent conflict. It is what he wants.

 

[KWED]

Jesus told us why. He explained how hard it is for rich people to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Ever heard the expression "you can't take it with you"?
Once we are dead, we are all equally penniless. Any wealth we have is inherited by our survivors. This is specifically dealt with in the Quran. No rich person has ever attempted to enter the kingdom of heaven so the claim is meaningless - which seems odd for a messenger of god.