Atheists, if God existed, would it be reasonable to expect God to...

[9-10ths_Penguin]

He did... The Works of Bahá'u'lláh

Baha'u'llah - who died in 1892 - made a website? That's impressive.

 

[CG Didymus]

The Messengers of God do not communicate TO God, God communicates to them, and it is not really a two-way conversation.

Abraham remained standing before the LORD. 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” 26 The LORD said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

I have no idea what you think is contradictory. Yes, Baha'u'llah wrote that Abraham and Moses, Noah and Adam were Prophets/Manifestations of God.

You are contradictory. You say the messengers don't communicate with God and here Abraham is talking to God. So, you don't care what the Bible says. You only know what you think the Baha'i Faith says. You say the Scriptures of the other religions have been abrogated one time, and then say they are "just" stories other times. Which is it? If they were just stories, as in fiction, as in myth, what is there to abrogate? They were never true. And, it sure seems like that is your true position. The Scriptures of the other religions were never true, especially the Bible. But since that doesn't really square with Baha'i beliefs, the next best thing is to say the Scriptures of the other religions have been "abrogated". So we don't need them. We don't need to study them. And we no longer have to believe in them. So again, how are you different from an atheist? There doesn't seem to be a thing you believe in or like about the other religions.

 

[Bird123]

There is a reason I am posting this question and it is for the same reason I posted the other thread I posted about a week ago:

Would/Should God communicate directly to everyone in the world?

The reason I am posting this is because I have been posting to an atheist on some other forums for over five years and he insists that if god existed god would communicate directly to every single person in the world rather than using messengers. He should really come here and post his own question but he won’t come here so I am posting EXACTLY what he wants me to post this time, since he said that the questions on my other thread were not what he would have asked.

Here it is, a direct quote from him, turned into a question for you:

“Is there every reason to believe that if God existed, and wanted to achieve the result of the maximum number of people getting and believing any message he wanted them to get and believe, that he would use the same method used by all imaginary gods (messengers) which achieves results worse than reason demands would be achieved by using what only a real god could use: direct communication?”

Of course he is making an unfounded assumption that God is trying to achieve the result of the maximum number of people getting and believing His message, although there is no way he can know that is what God is trying to achieve.

His premise is that since imaginary gods use messengers a real God would never use a Messenger. What he is really saying is that because there are false messengers (men who claim to speak for God), God would never send a Messenger who speaks for God. Of course this is patently illogical. That is like saying that just because there is a junkyard with junky cars that do not run there cannot be a new car lot down the street with cars that run nicely.

The quote:“Is there every reason to believe that if God existed, and wanted to achieve the result of the maximum number of people getting and believing any message he wanted them to get and believe, that he would use the same method used by all imaginary gods (messengers) which achieves results worse than reason demands would be achieved by using what only a real god could use: direct communication?”

My Answer: This is a reasonable quote. God has Great Intelligence. There are better ways than sending messengers. God could have even implanted the knowledge before we were born.

Everything about God will add up. Clearly messengers do not.

Still, to find the real truth, one must know what God really wants. It does not make sense that God would place the belief in truth over knowing the truth. Hmm? that is more that does not add up.

As I see it, God does not want anyone to Accept holy books. God wants people to Discover the truth for themselves.

Holy Books are creations of mankind. Further, if God can talk to messengers, God can talk with anyone. Also, those messengers sound more like mankind than God. Question them instead of blindly accept them.

Religions teach people to value Beliefs over all else simply because that is all they have. Religions have to set up conditions such as messengers so that you must go through them to get to God. Does this sound like the actions of a God capable of creating universes? Once again it does not add up.

Does God really need anyone speaking for Him? Does God really need messengers to bring kiddies to Him? Is God really helpless? It doesn't add up. Look around you. God is far from helpless.

As I have said before, Everything about God will add up. I have found the stories and holy books of religion do not.

God's system has worked before religion was invented and it will still work after religion becomes obsolete.

How does one discover this system? Look around you. You are in it. God hides nothing. The knowledge exists around us all waiting to be Discovered.

Yes, that is what I am seeing. The Math is going to add up. So many focus on the Feeling part of God, let's not forget to make everything about this world add up so well, there is an Intellectual part that can not be ignored.

 

[Trailblazer]

Baha'u'llah - who died in 1892 - made a website? That's impressive.

No, obviously Baha'u'llah could not make God's messages available to everyone while He was alive, and even if He did there would be more people born after He died, so what about them? That is why we have books, and now websites.

 

[CG Didymus]

I see no contradiction in the Messages given by each of God's Messengers.

What are you looking for, or at, to see it that way?

Every religion has things that other religions contradict. You use the magic Baha'i eraser to eliminate them. Hindu's say that there is reincarnation and many Gods. Baha'is erase it. The NT says Jesus rose from the dead and that Satan is real. Baha'is erase it. The differences are in the Scriptures, but Baha'is still find ways to erase it.​

There are no contradictions, just additions. A new chapter in a book does not contradict the previous chapters, it just adds onto them. It is the believers who contradict each other because they do not understand what the Messengers said in the chapters, and they add onto it and embellish it.

Hmmm? Chapters that you don't read nor understand nor care about.

Hmmm? Believers wrote at least some of the stories that became Scriptures in some of the religions. Did they understand the message? No, how could they. They were not the messenger. So God sent a messenger that told his message and let his followers write it down. Yeah, that's a real good way to make sure you message gets delivered accurately.

So there are no "chapters" to the book of God's messages is there. It's only second-hand, messed up, misinterpreted things that the messenger might have said and done. At best, you can put al the Scriptures of all the other religions in one book and call it an anthology.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are contradictory. You say the messengers don't communicate with God and here Abraham is talking to God. So, you don't care what the Bible says.

As I recall, Baha'u'llah wrote that Moses "held converse" with God so if I said Messengers don't communicate with God I was mistaken.

No, I do not care what the Bible says, quite frankly. I think it should be burned for all the damage it has done to innocent people, not the least of which are the atheists who cannot believe in God because of that miserable Book.

And, it sure seems like that is your true position. The Scriptures of the other religions were never true, especially the Bible.

I never said that, I said that they are not authentic and that much of what is written has been misinterpreted by most people. I also said that much of them were intended to be interpreted figuratively, not literally.

But since that doesn't really square with Baha'i beliefs, the next best thing is to say the Scriptures of the other religions have been "abrogated". So we don't need them. We don't need to study them. And we no longer have to believe in them.

I never said that the SCRIPTURES of other religions have been abrogated; I said that the DISPENSATIONS of other religions have been abrogated. The scriptures can never be abrogated because they are the Word of God. The dispensations can be abrogated by God because God is All-Powerful.

I never said anything about what YOU or anyone else needs to do. I said that I do not need any of them because I have the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. Do I need to know ancient history or what is going on in the world today? What will happen to me if I know no history at all? NOTHING. Can you even think logically at all? Well, you are not a Baha'i, you are undecided, so it is different fro you. Go ahead, cling to that Bible until the day you die, I do not care.

So again, how are you different from an atheist? There doesn't seem to be a thing you believe in or like about the other religions.

How am I different from an atheist? I believe in the one true God.

I do like other religions. I have been listening to Christian radio all day long, as I always do when I am on forums. I share a lot of Christian beliefs but that does not mean I believe ALL the things they believe and that does not mean I feel it is necessary to refer to the Bible. Do Christians refer to the Writings of Baha'u'llah? Why do you put these ridiculous requirements on Baha'is?

 

[CG Didymus]

I do believe in the messages in other scriptures, I just realize they are not authentic and I interpret them my own way.

And what is it that you believe about the messages in the other Scriptures? Oh nothing, because you don't read them or study them.

Sorry, but no doctoring has been done, because that assumes that there is a correct interpretation that someone else has and we messed with that.

Hmmm? The usual, four gospels in the NT says Jesus came back to life. Baha'is don't believe that, so they interpret it the way they want to. Of course that is not "doctoring" to Baha'is. That is giving the "true" interpretation of the resurrection story... right. Call it myth. Call embellished BS. Call it nothing but a fabricated lie, but why do Baha'is pretend to believe in the NT when they don't. After all, Jesus didn't write it. Just call it what it is... stories made up by the followers of Jesus to make him out to be a God/man.

Hmmm? Chapters in a book? Hmmm? Let me look at that again. Yes, chapters in a fictional book. Chapters that don't go together. That contradict each other, because they are myth. They don't need to go together. They are the myths and legends of different people in different places and at different times. If one has people dying and returning... fine. Leave it alone. It's their myth. If another has a God/man dying and rising... leave it alone. It is their fabricated, embellished story. It gave them hope and something to believe in. Why take it away from them just to replace it with your myth?

 

[Trailblazer]

Hmmm? Believers wrote at least some of the stories that became Scriptures in some of the religions. Did they understand the message? No, how could they. They were not the messenger.

So there are no "chapters" to the book of God's messages is there. It's only second-hand, messed up, misinterpreted things that the messenger might have said and done.

True, but that was the best humanity had up until now.
Don't ask me why because I do not know. Only God knows why.

 

[Trailblazer]

And what is it that you believe about the messages in the other Scriptures? Oh nothing, because you don't read them or study them.

And you know that how? Are you God?

Hmmm? The usual, four gospels in the NT says Jesus came back to life. Baha'is don't believe that, so they interpret it the way they want to. Of course that is not "doctoring" to Baha'is. That is giving the "true" interpretation of the resurrection story... right. Call it myth. Call embellished BS. Call it nothing but a fabricated lie, but why do Baha'is pretend to believe in the NT when they don't. After all, Jesus didn't write it. Just call it what it is... stories made up by the followers of Jesus to make him out to be a God/man.

Hmmm? Chapters in a book? Hmmm? Let me look at that again. Yes, chapters in a fictional book. Chapters that don't go together. That contradict each other, because they are myth. They don't need to go together. They are the myths and legends of different people in different places and at different times. If one has people dying and returning... fine. Leave it alone. It's their myth. If another has a God/man dying and rising... leave it alone. It is their fabricated, embellished story. It gave them hope and something to believe in. Why take it away from them just to replace it with your myth?

Do you ever get tired of this ranting about Baha'is?
What does this do for you?
I get tired of listening to it. Let me know when you have something NEW to say.

FYI, not ALL Christians *believe* that Jesus rose from the dead:

Alternative beliefs by some liberal & mainline Christians, secularists, etc.

Resurrection views- Religious tolerance

There is a near consensus among liberal, and some mainline theologians, that:

• The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not written by Jesus' disciples but by person or persons whose names are unknown.
• Neither Paul nor any of the Gospel writers had been an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry, execution, or after-death appearances.
• The Gospels record the beliefs and memories of various Christian groups as they had evolved at the time they were written.
• God did not directly inspire the authors of the Bible. Instead, the writers composed text in support of their personal beliefs and those of their faith group. In particular, the Gospels contain various passages of religious myths which describe Christian traditions which were invented after Jesus' death.
• The Bible is not inerrant. Many passages in the Gospels and Epistles of the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) contain religious propaganda, beliefs unique to the author and his/her faith group, words created by the authors and attributed to Jesus, stories of events that never happened, material picked up from surrounding Pagan cultures, etc.

Liberals compare Bible passages in the light of contemporary Jewish, Pagan and non-canonical Christian writings. They also study the culture of the time and the beliefs of surrounding Pagan societies. Of particular interest are the evolving beliefs of the followers of Christ during the approximately seven decades between the crucifixion and the completion of the last Gospel, John. They have come to very different conclusions about the resurrection.

What many liberal theologians believe about Jesus' death:
Many liberal and some mainline Christian leaders believe that Jesus died during the crucifixion, did not resurrect himself, and was not bodily resurrected by God. At his death, his mind ceased to function and his body started the decomposition process. Returning to life a day and a half later would have been quite impossible. The story of having been wrapped in linen and anointed with myrrh seems to have been copied from the story of the death of Osiris -- the Egyptian God of the earth, vegetation and grain. The legend that he visited the underworld between his death and resurrection was simply copied from common Pagan themes of surrounding cultures. One example again was Osiris. "With his original association to agriculture, his death and resurrection were seen as symbolic of the annual death and re-growth of the crops and the yearly flooding of the Nile." 1

They also believe that Paul regarded the resurrection to be an act of God in which Jesus was a passive recipient of God's power. Paul did not mention the empty tomb, the visit by a woman or women, the stone, the angel/angels/man/men at the tomb, and reunion of Jesus with his followers in his resuscitated body. Rather, he believed that Jesus was taken up into heaven in a spirit body. It was only later, from about 70 to 110 CE when the four canonic Gospels were written, that the Christians believed that Jesus rose from the grave in his original body, and by his own power.

Later, perhaps after Paul's death, there was great disappointment within the Christian communities because Jesus had not returned as expected. They diverted their focus of attention away from Jesus' second coming. They studied his life and death more intensely. Legends without a historical basis were created by the early church; these included the empty tomb and described Jesus returning in his original body to eat and talk with his followers.

In previous centuries, almost all Christians believed in miracles as described in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). These included creation, the story of Adam and Eve, a talking serpent, the great flood of Noah, the drying up of the Red/Reed sea, a prophet riding on a talking ***, the sun stopping in the sky, etc. From the Christian Scriptures (New Testament), they believed in the virgin birth, the Christmas star, angels appearing to the shepherds, Jesus healing the sick, etc. Many, perhaps most, liberal Christians now believe that these stories are not to be interpreted literally as real events. Their faith has not been damaged by losing faith in the reality of these events. A growing number of liberals are now taking the final step by interpreting the stories of Jesus' resurrection and his appearances to his followers and to Paul as other than real events. Retired bishop John Shelby Spong commented:

"I do admit that for Christians to enter this subject honestly is to invite great anxiety. It is to walk the razor's edge, to run the risk of cutting the final cord still binding many to the faith of their mothers and fathers. But the price for refusing to enter this consideration is for me even higher. The inability to question reveals that one has no confidence that one's belief system will survive such an inquiry. That is a tacit recognition that on unconscious levels, one's faith has already died. If one seeks to protect God from truth or new insights, then God has surely already died." 3

http://www.religioustolerance.org/resur_lt.htm

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Every religion has things that other religions contradict. You use the magic Baha'i eraser to eliminate them. Hindu's say that there is reincarnation and many Gods. Baha'is erase it. The NT says Jesus rose from the dead and that Satan is real. Baha'is erase it. The differences are in the Scriptures, but Baha'is still find ways to erase it.

The differences are in our chosen reality, our frame of reference, our interpretations and not in what God has offered.

One must want to look for the oneness. One must not forget science can balance faith.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

The quote:“Is there every reason to believe that if God existed, and wanted to achieve the result of the maximum number of people getting and believing any message he wanted them to get and believe, that he would use the same method used by all imaginary gods (messengers) which achieves results worse than reason demands would be achieved by using what only a real god could use: direct communication?”

My Answer: This is a reasonable quote. God has Great Intelligence. There are better ways than sending messengers.

Then why didn't the ALL-KNOWING God use another way?

God could have even implanted the knowledge before we were born.

He could have but He didn't. Why would He? Why should He? Why have a brain if we cannot use it for something?

Everything about God will add up. Clearly messengers do not.

Not to you.

Still, to find the real truth, one must know what God really wants.

Right, and the only way to know what God wants is through the revealed Word of God.

As I see it, God does not want anyone to Accept holy books.
So God inspires holy books for nothing?
God wants people to Discover the truth for themselves.

How, by looking around?

Holy Books are creations of mankind.

Yes, some of them are.

Further, if God can talk to messengers, God can talk with anyone.

God could but God chooses not to.

Also, those messengers sound more like mankind than God. Question them instead of blindly accept them.

That is because they are half human. No, we should not blindly accept them.

Religions teach people to value Beliefs over all else simply because that is all they have.

No, we do not value beliefs over all else, we value deeds.

Religions have to set up conditions such as messengers so that you must go through them to get to God. Does this sound like the actions of a God capable of creating universes? Once again it does not add up.

No, God set it up so we would have to go through Messengers. It has nothing to do with God's capabilities, it has to do with human capabilities. Humans cannot understand God directly.

Does God really need anyone speaking for Him? Does God really need messengers to bring kiddies to Him? Is God really helpless? It doesn't add up. Look around you. God is far from helpless.

Yes, God needs them because humans need them since God cannot come on down to earth and speak for Himself, since God is spirit.

As I have said before, Everything about God will add up. I have found the stories and holy books of religion do not.

Add up for who?

God's system has worked before religion was invented and it will still work after religion becomes obsolete.

There was no "before religion" as there has always been religion, from the dawn of human history.

How does one discover this system? Look around you. You are in it. God hides nothing. The knowledge exists around us all waiting to be Discovered.

Yes, it is all around but we need a Guide to tell us how to use it. Not everyone is wise.

Yes, that is what I am seeing. The Math is going to add up. So many focus on the Feeling part of God, let's not forget to make everything about this world add up so well, there is an Intellectual part that can not be ignored.

I agree, we should focus more on the intellectual than the feeling part because feelings can lead us astray.[/QUOTE]

 

[HonestJoe]

Logically speaking, why would there be consistency across Messengers? I mean why would God send NEW Messengers with exactly the same message?

There must have been thousands of individuals throughout history claiming to speak for God (or having that claim made for them), many living in the same eras. I don't think you're considering all purported messengers, only a selected subset who fit your beliefs.

I said that we cannot know what God is doing right now wherever God is, but we can know some things God has done, such as giving humans free will to make choices. We cannot know in the sense of being able to prove that, but we know it through scriptures that come through Messengers.

Most messed-up word-play. You're essentially saying that you get to make definitive statements about God because you "know" (i.e. believe) but nobody else can because we can't know.

You might have a point there. On the other hand, just because God knows what will happen that does not mean it is written in stone, because what God knows will happen can change according to what humans choose to do. Of course, since God is All-Knowing, God knew it would change, but it did not change until we made the choice and changed what could have happened. If we are talking about fate and predestination, there are two kinds, according to my beliefs.

Your beliefs are illogical. Everything is about cause and effect. Knowing everything means you know all of the causes and all of the effects they will lead to. The idea of what that will happen changing is meaningless. There is only one version of a thing that will ever happen. If a person is going to "change their mind" before acting, they will have always been going to "change their mind".

Of course, you're also suggesting that God is subject to time and couldn't simply see what happened from the point of view after the event.

The way I know that is because it is written throughout the Writings of Baha’u’llah, but it is possible we might know more about God after we die and get closer to God in the spiritual world.

I've already picked you up on this abstract use of the word "know". If you keep doing it without clarifying the context, it stops being an misunderstanding and becomes an intentional lie.

No, logically speaking, God cannot stop being God because then God would no longer be God.

So what? You've still given no reason God couldn't stop being God. Though of course, wouldn't that reason be something to do with the "essence" of God you've previously said we can't understand?

God is omnipotent but that does not mean God can do anything.

Yes it does. That is literally what it means. If you're proposing a God with some limitations, you're not proposing an omnipotent God. You're free to propose that but you can't have it both ways.

We can use logic to determine if the existence of God makes logical sense to us; what I meant is that God cannot be bound by what we think is logical, since God is infinite and cannot be bound by anything.

You've been saying there are things God can't do, about knowing the future or stopping being God, based on (attempted) logic though. Yet again, you're trying to have it both ways. You want to apply your logic to God but dismiss any logic I apply in the same way.

So I guess you are saying that the only reason people even have religious beliefs is because the real world is scary and depressing.

I said "beliefs", not "religious beliefs". The latter is just a simple sub-set of the former. We're all in the same position here and there is nothing automatically unique, special or better about any of our approaches to it. The fundamental issue here is that you think you have a special answer to things and so you're not willing or able to accept anything that really challenges it. You are far from alone in that though and very much on the agreeable end of that scale.

 

[CG Didymus]

That's an awful lot of conjecture on your part. I'd appreciate a few passages from the Bible that prove each of these points. I want something very specific, because I don't believe you know what you're talking about.

Here's the original quote. It is not QuestioningMind. It is Trailblazer.

Here is the reason: The Messengers of God are another order of creation above an ordinary man. Their souls had pre-existence in the spiritual world before their bodies were born in this world, whereas the souls of all humans come into being at the moment of conception. The spiritual world is where They get their special powers from God. They possess a universal divine mind that is different than ours and that is why God only speaks to them directly and through Them God communicates to humanity.

 

[CG Didymus]

God gave us the rules but God gave us free will so that is why we can break any rules we choose to break.

What is the official Baha'i quote about "free will".

I pray to God

That's what I would expect. So does God hear your prayers and answers them?

Logically speaking, why would there be consistency across Messengers? I mean why would God send NEW Messengers with exactly the same message?

The messages are not the same. Many Gods, one God, one God with an evil adversary. Live a good life and get good karma, Believe in Jesus to be saved from the penalty of sin. Lots of different things out there that are straight from Scriptures.

As I recall, Baha'u'llah wrote that Moses "held converse" with God so if I said Messengers don't communicate with God I was mistaken.

And if I wouldn't have pointed that out, from the Bible, you would have still believed you were right. But, then do you and I really believe that Abraham really had that conversation with God? Even the conversation that Moses had? Talking to God from within a burning bush? And then God showed Moses his backside? You and I both probably don't believe that literally do we? So if it is only "symbolic" and didn't really happen, then God didn't necessarily talk directly to either Abraham or Moses. But now you, as a Baha'i, have to belief it because Baha'u'llah acknowledged it?

No, I do not care what the Bible says, quite frankly. I think it should be burned for all the damage it has done to innocent people, not the least of which are the atheists who cannot believe in God because of that miserable Book.

Yes, and what about the other Holy Books that have led people to kill others. But the Bible has God ordering the massacre. Like in Jericho all the people, including women and children, were ordered by God to be killed. Is it the book that is horrible or the main character of that book that is horrible... the wrathful God that blows up cities and drowns all the people in a flood.

I never said that the SCRIPTURES of other religions have been abrogated; I said that the DISPENSATIONS of other religions have been abrogated. The scriptures can never be abrogated because they are the Word of God. The dispensations can be abrogated by God because God is All-Powerful.

And what's the difference? I would hope that the not totally authentic writings of the other religions would be done away with. Things written by the followers, not the messenger, but now you call them the "Word of God"? Can you clarify the Baha'i position a little better?

The differences are in our chosen reality, our frame of reference, our interpretations and not in what God has offered.

One must want to look for the oneness. One must not forget science can balance faith.

Hmmm? Our frame of reference? We are born in Jerusalem 2500 years ago. What religion are we? We are born in Arabia 1000 years ago. What religion are we? One is taught the Hebrew Bible is the truth. The other the Quran. Now, we have you, the Baha'is, we can believe your version of truth and see that all religions are one. That they all taught the same message. That all the seeming contradictions aren't real.

Sure, believe that. But just don't look too deeply into the actual beliefs and practices of the different religions. Because they are not one. And they didn't all teach the same things. I know, I know, it's all in how you look at it. You see oneness. And I see differences. But I agree with you, we should have oneness, there is just one human race, but that is not because I think all religions taught the same thing. I do believe there has been a "progression" of religious beliefs. But not because one God planned it that way. I think we are progressing to a more sensible way of living together. And part of that is getting rid of supposed God-given religious rules that don't work. And part of that is questioning whether or not there ever was a being called God that sent all these messengers with their varying messages.

And when did science come into the picture? And science is never wrong? Can scientists be biased? So a person can find "science" to prove their pov, while another person can find scientific proof that shows the opposite. So where does that leave us? A Christian can point to evidence that the world is less than 10,000 years old. Big Bangers can show how the Earth is billions of years old. And what do Baha'is believe? No doubt something that contradicts the Bible and other Holy Books. You might have a better message. You might have the correct message. But still, those other Books said things that were contrary to what Baha'is say is true. And, unfortunately, that makes one thing that Baha'is say not true... that all the messages said the same thing, or were consistent, or were all from the same source or however Baha'is say it. Religions have differences that are more and deeper than just the "social laws" being different.

 

[j1i]

Who made the gas?
Who's making the digestive system
If you do not know the answer please give up and don't waste my time,
I will shorten the way for you
God is the first with no beginning and no birth and the last with no end to succession
But the difference is who is the true God
You are now close to reaching it just need a dose of luck

No, no, no! You've got it ALL wrong! It was my magical farting pixie that is the FIRST, with NO beginning and NO birth and the LAST with no end to succession!

You see, if YOU can make fantastical unsubstantiated claims about your god being, then I can ALSO make fantastical unsubstantiated claims about My magical pixie.

These scientists are unable to survive more than 100 years or a little more
The power of scientists in this sections to speak because it is free hahahaha.
Because of the lack of evidence and proofs, everyone is enjoying their fake ideas
They speak with mood, philosophical and imaginary ideas, contradictory claims and different theories among scholars
huh. Having a degree does not mean you always understand

The above is just an incomprehensible collection of words. Though from what I COULD understand, it sounds as if you're completely clueless about how the scientific method works. So sad.

I am superior to you, one point ahead
Koran says that there is smoke in the heavens, although we can not as humans before 1440 years to see the smoke in the heavens
I have a copy before 1400 in the museum proving this miracle
He even said that meteors that fall, contain copper element

Yet there IS no 'smoke' in the heavens... so your ancient book of myths got it WRONG. And any person who happened to find a fallen meteor could EASILY figure out that it contained copper. HARDLY a 'divine' insight. No wonder you are so easily manipulated into believing in nonsense.

I will leave the subject of bringing links to the miracles of the Qur'an to not let you to elude the main answers

come here
The founder of exist should be not inanimate without thinking
There must be a capacity for creativity
Just a gas? Are we in the kitchen gas cooking food without a chef (cook)?
You cooking there must be a cook preparing food
There is no logical answer

The presence of magical fart
The word magic opens the door for us to think that this thing is reasonable and has the ability to be creative or why it is called

What will you say now
It is foolish to say magical fart (the word magic refers to the existence of a hidden scientific mechanism)
There is no real scientist who says that there is inanimate create the complex creation, even if the system of evolution, only in the presence of a creative founder

Its not good using adolescence and Shuffle

 

[TransmutingSoul]

And if I wouldn't have pointed that out, from the Bible, you would have still believed you were right. But, then do you and I really believe that Abraham really had that conversation with God? Even the conversation that Moses had? Talking to God from within a burning bush? And then God showed Moses his backside? You and I both probably don't believe that literally do we? So if it is only "symbolic" and didn't really happen, then God didn't necessarily talk directly to either Abraham or Moses. But now you, as a Baha'i, have to belief it because Baha'u'llah acknowledged it?

It is a concept hard to grasp. A Bahai does not have all the answers, a Baha'i has access to a lot more on the subject that can then be considered. Unless it has been fully explained, we still have a clash of different opinions.

From how I currently see it and that changes, I see it is the Word that spoke from the Burning Bush. All we can know of God is the Messengers, it is the Messengers that are the Word. So what I see is that it was 'Christ' the Holy Spirit that spoke forth from the burning bush.

This is where Jesus is not God, but also is God as the Word, this from Baha'u'llah may help;

"In the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, Bahá’u’lláh again and again speaks with the Voice of God, a station that He affirms in this passage from the Súriy-i-Haykal:

Naught is seen in My temple but the Temple of God, and in My beauty but His Beauty, and in My being but His Being, and in My self but His Self, and in My movement but His Movement, and in My acquiescence but His Acquiescence, and in My pen but His Pen, the Mighty, the All-Praised. There hath not been in My soul but the Truth, and in Myself naught could be seen but God.… The Holy Spirit Itself hath been generated through the agency of a single letter revealed by this Most Great Spirit, if ye be of them that comprehend."

That is not the human aspect of Baha'u'llah, that is the Word speaking, that is God speaking. God has no other mouths but those that come forth from the Holy Spirit.

Us born of the human spirit must be born again to connect with that spirit. One can also see how each Messenger is born of the Holy Spirit, the virgin birth Metephor becomes more clear.

So the Most Great Spirit is the Pimal Source and the Holy Spirit enamates from that source and is seen in each age as the awakening of God's chosen Messenger, explained like this;

"...It was in such dramatic circumstances, recalling the experience of Moses when face to face with the Burning Bush in the wilderness of Sinai, the successive visions of Zoroaster, the opening of the heavens and the descent of the Dove upon Christ in the Jordan, the cry of Gabriel heard by Muḥammad in the Cave of Hira, and the dream of the Báb, in which the blood of the Imam Ḥusayn touched and sanctified His lips, that Bahá’u’lláh, He “around Whom the Point of the Bayán hath revolved,” and the Vehicle of the greatest Revelation the world has yet seen, received the first intimation of His sublime Mission, and that a ministry which, alike in its duration and fecundity, is unsurpassed in the religious history of mankind, was inaugurated. It was on that occasion that the “Most Great Spirit,” as designated by Bahá’u’lláh Himself, revealed itself to Him, in the form of a “Maiden,” and bade Him “lift up” His “voice between earth and heaven”—that same Spirit which, in the Zoroastrian, the Mosaic, the Christian, and Muḥammadan Dispensations, had been respectively symbolized by the “Sacred Fire,” the “Burning Bush,” the “Dove,” and the “Angel Gabriel.”

So as you can see, no one has touched the surface of what we can know, we are all sorting it out in our finite minds.

This letter explains the concerns, as Bahai also struggle with these concepts;

15 October 1992 – [To an individual] | Bahá’í Reference Library

This extract will cause interest;

On a related subject, the following reply to a question from an individual believer was written on behalf of the Guardian 19 October 1947:

".... Bahá’u’lláh is not the Intermediary between other Manifestations and God. Each has His own relation to the Primal Source. But in the sense that Bahá’u’lláh is the greatest Manifestation to yet appear, the One Who consummates the Revelation of Moses, He was the One Moses conversed with in the Burning Bush. In other words Bahá’u’lláh identifies the Glory of the Godhead on that occasion with Himself. No distinction can be made amongst the Prophets in the sense that They all proceed from one source, and are of one essence. But Their stations and functions in this world are different.... "


Regards Tony

 

[QuestioningMind]

I will leave the subject of bringing links to the miracles of the Qur'an to not let you to elude the main answers

come here
The founder of exist should be not inanimate without thinking
There must be a capacity for creativity
Just a gas? Are we in the kitchen gas cooking food without a chef (cook)?
You cooking there must be a cook preparing food
There is no logical answer

The presence of magical fart
The word magic opens the door for us to think that this thing is reasonable and has the ability to be creative or why it is called

What will you say now
It is foolish to say magical fart (the word magic refers to the existence of a hidden scientific mechanism)
There is no real scientist who says that there is inanimate create the complex creation, even if the system of evolution, only in the presence of a creative founder

Its not good using adolescence and Shuffle

Wow... NONE of that made even the slightest bit of sense to me. It's nothing but a bunch of incomplete sentences and incomprehensible thoughts strung together. Sorry, but until you can learn how to communicate in English, further attempts at communication are useless.

 

[j1i]

Wow... NONE of that made even the slightest bit of sense to me. It's nothing but a bunch of incomplete sentences and incomprehensible thoughts strung together. Sorry, but until you can learn how to communicate in English, further attempts at communication are useless.

Qatar is the country with the largest surplus of gas
they cannot even extract gas by themselves
There have no one scientist in the field of gas extraction

magical farting pixie (the word magic refers to the existence of a hidden scientific mechanism)
there is maker

There is a wonderful knows create of a universe

 

[QuestioningMind]

Qatar is the country with the largest surplus of gas
they cannot even extract gas by themselves
There have no one scientist in the field of gas extraction

magical farting pixie (the word magic refers to the existence of a hidden scientific mechanism)
there is maker

There is a wonderful knows create of a universe

Again, until you can learn how to communicate in English, further attempts at communication are useless.

 

[j1i]

Again, until you can learn how to communicate in English, further attempts at communication are useless.

magical farting pixie

Why scientists used the word magic
What is the meaning of the word magician in English or magic

magic means hidden science

This word was originally against the idea of the process of evolution
Magic is to create anything without evolution