Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I don't know. Only you would know your own motivations.What motivation would I have to say something like that, if it wasn’t true?
ciao
- viole
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I don't know. Only you would know your own motivations.What motivation would I have to say something like that, if it wasn’t true?
ciao
- viole
All claims require evidence if they are to be believed.Does such a claim requires any evidence?
If Messengers are what God sends as evidence then they are evidence whether that can be established as a fact or not. Moreover, the reason it cannot be established as a fact is because God does not want us to be able to establish it as a fact.Trailblazer said: ↑
One cannot 'establish' that God sent a Messenger because that cannot ever be known as a fact, and that is why it is a belief.
Then "Messengers" aren't evidence for God.
That’s right.The way we can identify someone as a Messenger of God is by looking at all the evidence that supports their claim.
When we haven't already established that God exists, any evidence that actually supports the claim that someone is a "Messenger of God" would also have to be evidence of God.
Because I never thought of doing that.Why wouldn't you just use that evidence to argue for God instead of all the extra circular steps?
When did I say that?My method might not work for you because you are a different person who thinks differently from me.
I believe that there is a rational path to belief in God but first one has to be able to think rationally.
You've effectively told me that such a path can't exist.
I would not expect anyone to follow any particular path. Everyone has to follow their own path and no two paths are alike. Most Baha’is probably believed in God before they became Baha’is but I was not raised in a religious home so I had no belief. I was not even searching for God or a religion when I stumbled upon the Baha’i Faith.No, not exactly. Initially I was attracted to Baha'u'llah's message. Baha'u'llah wrote about God and since I believe everything He wrote is true, I believe that God exists and that everything He wrote about God is true.
Okay. So not exactly the sort of path you would expect someone else to follow... right?
Why would God be responsible for making humans a certain way? What you are describing is a world where humans have no free will to choose between good and evil, in which case humans would simply be God's programmed robots.
Prove me wrong in any of the 27,027 posts that I have made in more than fourteen and a half years I have been on the forum.Yes, who needs that "baloney"? All we have is another religion that thinks it has all the answers.
Yeah, that is the rider - if one wants to believe, otherwise a claim is a claim and remains just that. And then the evidence is of two kinds, subjective and objective. Something that will satisfy you and does not satisfy others, or something which goes with scientific method. Some claims have been accepted by people without any evidence, a relic from stone ages, for example existence of Gods. Buddha warned against acceptance of such claims in his "Kesamutti sutta".All claims require evidence if they are to be believed.
Why does there need to be one?Well there is no contingency plan for free will gone bad.
Because God does not want to correct free will, God wants humans to use it to do good.And why should free will go bad at all with a God who can master and correct free will.
The all-loving Allah should have created safeguards against free will going bad for the benefit of the people. A free will gone bad does not restrict itself to the individual but affects other people as well. Your Allah is a incompetent designer, has never done anything right.Why does there need to be one?
Because God does not want to correct free will, God wants humans to use it to do good.
Can you think of a better design? Should God have created humans as programmable robots?The all-loving Allah should have created safeguards against free will going bad for the benefit of the people. A free will gone bad does not restrict itself to the individual but affects other people as well. Your Allah is a incompetent designer, has never done anything right.
What makes you think that God sent Covid-19? God is always a convenient fall guy since He is not here to defend Himself.Just take the example of sending us Covid-19. 235,438,565infections and 4,811,923 deaths till now, disruption of business and employment, supplies and education among young people. My grandsons have not gone to school or college for one and a half year now.
Of course I can. Just as you can presume there isn't any. Though, why you would want to presume that is a mystery to me.
Now you're just being childish. I guess that's what happens when you can't defend your own opinions and can't accept that they might be wrong, either. You just lash out blindly hoping to deflect attention away.
The claim has plenty of justification. (Not proof, just reasonable justification.)
And that's your problem to deal with. Many billions of other humans have, do, and will.
Do you really think being "right" is what matters?
No, ratiocinator....... I did not assume my conclusion, but you did assume the question by stuffing factors within it that you can't guess at.
You wrote ...'.... assume that they couldn't exist unless god created them'.
ratiuonator, I don't claim that God DID create anything...... I claim that God IS everything.
How did God get here?...... I don't know, its far to vast for me to guess.
God's first useless act (even if a God exists) was to create the universe where black holes prey on galaxies. Why could he not be content with his angels? Instead of creating Adam and Eve, he could have created a Goddess and have fun with her. You do one thing wrong then get flooded by wrong things.Can you think of a better design? Should God have created humans as programmable robots?
Experts say SARS-CoV-2 originated in bats. That’s also how the coronaviruses behind Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) got started.
.......
....,.........
Of course if you simply want to define 'god' to mean 'everything', then I guess it exists but it seems like a rather trivial and pointless idea of 'god' to me.
Can you think of a better design? Should God have created humans as programmable robots?
What makes you think that God sent Covid-19? God is always a convenient fall guy since He is not here to defend Himself.
God did not send Covid-19.
COVID-19
Common question
Where did the COVID-19 come from?
Experts say SARS-CoV-2 originated in bats. That’s also how the coronaviruses behind Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) got started.Aug 15, 2021
Coronavirus History: How did coronavirus start? - WebMD
https://www.webmd.com › ... › Coronavirus › Reference
That undeniable conclusion is reached only by people who recognize the evidence as evidence.
Of course there is, because facts are not presumed. Facts are small relative bits of information that we can know to be so. It's when we assemble them into theories of 'what is' that they become presumption. And it's very important that we keep in mind the difference, lest we start falling for our own delusions of 'what is'.
And yet that's what "believing in" our own theories of reality is: presuming that our theory of reality IS reality.
You said before that evidence is something that helps you build a case for a thing. How does the existence of someone who claims to speak for God - since that's all you can really have until you establish that God really did send them - help you build a case for God?If Messengers are what God sends as evidence then they are evidence whether that can be established as a fact or not.
If you really believe this, then why are you surprised that atheists - and any non-Baha'i, for that matter - aren't convinced of your position?Moreover, the reason it cannot be established as a fact is because God does not want us to be able to establish it as a fact.
Well, now you have. Does it change your approach?That’s right.
Because I never thought of doing that.
That's been most our discussion:When did I say that?
I would bet that most people believe in some sort of god before they settle on a particular religion.I would not expect anyone to follow any particular path. Everyone has to follow their own path and no two paths are alike. Most Baha’is probably believed in God before they became Baha’is but I was not raised in a religious home so I had no belief. I was not even searching for God or a religion when I stumbled upon the Baha’i Faith.
But the hugeness of everything isn't trivial..... it's huge!
I don't flog Deism and the bosses here don't support proslytizing but I can say that being a Deist helps me with feelings of contented calm.
That isn't what I'm claiming. All I am saying is that the existence of people who claim to speak for God is not evidence for the existence (or non-existence) of God. On it's own, the fact such people exist doesn't progress the argument either way and so can be dismissed entirely.The existence of false messengers of God does not prove that there are no true Messengers of God.
"A supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation."Okay, I might have a hypothesis but first explain what you mean by a hypothesis in simple terms.
I can't, you are the one making the claim here! If you can't explain anything about the God you're saying exists, how can you provide evidence that it does exist?So, the hypothesis is what is being evidenced? Then tell me what you think needs to be evidenced.