Atheists: What would be evidence of God’s existence?

[Trailblazer]

A "permanent" record that God spoke? Isn't the what the Bible is supposed to be? Along with speaking from heaven, it tells us how he created everything. It tells us how he flooded the world and all the rest. And some people look at that record and say, "No way, that's nuts."

The Bible was at best God speaking to men through the Holy Spirit and that is only if you believe that.

That leaves us with the record of the Baha'i Faith. That's our "permanent" record of who God is, what he wants and tells us all about his laws. And that voice from heaven is Baha'u'llah. But that voice is pretty hard for some of us to hear. There's too much distortion or something.

It is our record of who God is until another Messenger comes and speaks. Not everyone will believe that or understand what Baha'u'llah wrote, at least not for a very long time.

 

[Tiberius]

I think it is possible to have absolute proof, if that proof was bestowed by God to certain individuals.

But in order to show that your proof was absolute proof, you'd need to have absolute proof that it was bestowed by God.

I cannot see why that would matter. All that matters is what is the truth. The truth is the truth regardless of what people believe (what results they get).

But if you have what you claim is the truth, then it must be something you believe.

Neither one could be verified.
What I meant is that the booming voice might be more believable than the person who claims to be a Messenger of God.

But that's not what you said before.

If your opinion is so easily swayed, you might benefit from giving it more consideration before you settle on one.

It would not be evidence of God's existence unless it was actually God's voice. How could we verify that? You just said that absolute proof is reserved for mathematics and alcohol. With everything else, all we have is likelihood. How likely would it be that it was God speaking from the sky, given that God has never spoken from the sky, except in Bible stories that can never be verified?

How likely is it that a person is a messenger from God, given that God has never sent messengers except in Bible stories that can never be verified?

I am suggesting that the booming voice is not God's strategy at all, since there is no proof that God ever spoke to the Israelites on Mt. Sinai.

However, IF God spoke to the Israelites it was only a here-and-now event employed for a specific purpose God was trying to accomplish at that time in history. It was NOT a method of communication God ever planned to employ again.

I am also saying that even if God spoke with a booming voice as the Bible alleged, the booming voice did not accomplish all that much since only the Jews heard it and there are very few Jews in the world. In other words, the booming voice did not help all the other people in the world to believe in God and even many Jews lost faith in God after the Holocaust.... so much for the booming voice.

And why shouldn't it be his strategy?

The relevance is that the booming Voice of God, if there ever was one, did not help anyone except the Jews who heard it and those Jews who believe it now owing to their scriptures.

And what difference does the number make?

The point I am trying to make is that the booming voice of God, if there ever was one, did not help anyone to believe in God except the Jews who heard it, and only a few Jews heard the voice relative to the population of the world. So how does that help you or any other atheist to believe in God?

But how could they hear it if it didn't happen? Therefore, since they believe it,. it must have happened, and thus the Jewish faith is correct.

That's essentially religious logic.

 

[Trailblazer]

But in order to show that your proof was absolute proof, you'd need to have absolute proof that it was bestowed by God.

One can know that they have absolute proof yet not be able to show it to others. After all, it was bestowed by God to them so is personal. How could they ever show it to anyone else?

But if you have what you claim is the truth, then it must be something you believe.

I do believe I have the truth.

But that's not what you said before.

If your opinion is so easily swayed, you might benefit from giving it more consideration before you settle on one.

I do not have to settle. Often new thoughts come to mind as I converse so I have another opinion.

How likely is it that a person is a messenger from God, given that God has never sent messengers except in Bible stories that can never be verified?

Why would we need to rely upon the Bible stories in order to know if God sent Messengers?

And why shouldn't it be his strategy?

God chooses His own strategies...
Even if it was God's strategy 3600 years ago obviously it is not God's strategy now.

And what difference does the number make?

It doesn't make any difference unless it matters how many people believe in God.

But how could they hear it if it didn't happen? Therefore, since they believe it,. it must have happened, and thus the Jewish faith is correct.

That's essentially religious logic.

But that is not my logic.

 

[Kfox]

Do you think that God should talk to all of the 7.8 billion people in the world?

Of course!

If not, why would God talk to only certain people and not others?

He should communicate with everybody.

Why should God talk to everyone directly when God can send a Messenger to address everyone in the world?

Messengers have no credibility.

But I consider that a moot point because I do not believe that God could talk to you or any human in a way that they could understand because nobody except the Messengers can understand God. It is only because they have a divine mind that they can understand God.

Then God should give everybody a divine mind so we can all understand him equally.

 

[Kfox]

Although, at different times, I believed three very different things about God... In all of them, part of the belief was that God was inside and communicating with me.

So, is it just the sub-conscious mind, considering that I was believing in something different each time, or was that really a spiritual being talking to me and guiding me? Because deep inside I knew that this God wanted some things to be done other things not done. So, I think it could have been my sub-conscious mind being that little voice inside telling me what was right and what was wrong.

But then there are interactions with people in the other religions. If my mind is locked in on believing certain things about God and what he wants, and a person, like a Baha'i, comes along and contradicts those beliefs, my mind is going to fight against those things... Even if it sounds reasonable... But there's always something that isn't.

It works the other way too. If a Christians tells a Baha'i that Jesus rose from the dead, or that the flood story and creation are real, the things they've implanted into their brain and called "Truth", isn't going to believe it. But both Baha'is and Christians have "God" stuck in their heads and filed away under the heading, "Absolute Truth". To them, it sure seems like, somehow, that is objectively true. And especially for some of them, they do hear and feel God working in them and guiding them. But, just between Christians and Baha'is, that's two very different concepts of God. And they are both guiding people? Or it's all in their heads?

Unless you wanna believe God is guiding 2 different people in different directions, it must be all in your head.

 

[Trailblazer]

Of course!

Why should God do that?

He should communicate with everybody.

Why should God do that?

Messengers have no credibility.

Not for you.

Then God should give everybody a divine mind so we can all understand him equally.

Why should God do that?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Messengers have no credibility..
.

Apparently, they do.
In fact, so much so, that people often think that a person can be G-d !

 

[samtonga43]

What is objectively true is true.

You said that we can prove to ourselves that a 'messenger' is true.

That truth is not objective truth.
Do you understand this?

 

[Kfox]

Why should God do that?

Why should God do that?

If God wants us to know what he wants, he should communicate with us in a way we can recognize

Not for you.

Not just me, most people.

Why should God do that?

Mark Twain once said:
A foolish man's account of a wise man's words are never accurate because he has to translate the message in a way that he can understand it before passing it along to others.
I'm just saying God needs to quit depending on these fools to pass along his message, and pass it along himself. Yes! I said it; words of wisdom should come from the source; never second hand information.

 

[Kfox]

Apparently, they do.
In fact, so much so, that people often think that a person can be G-d !

Those people you speak of are the exception; not the rule.

 

[CG Didymus]

Unless you wanna believe God is guiding 2 different people in different directions, it must be all in your head.

Yeah, I'm thinking that people get their concepts and beliefs stuck in their head, and their thinking reflects that. And they can hear that little voice of God telling them what is right and what is wrong. If that little voice was consistent and the same for all people, then maybe there could be one God that is inside guiding people. But, since that voice is different for everybody, and depends on the beliefs that a person holds, then that voice is very possibly only in their head. So is God then made up inside a person's head and then takes over their subconscious mind?

 

[CG Didymus]

But I consider that a moot point because I do not believe that God could talk to you or any human in a way that they could understand because nobody except the Messengers can understand God. It is only because they have a divine mind that they can understand God.

So God can make people with "divine" minds, but he makes most people without the ability to understand him directly. And makes them dependent on what others say? Those that claim to have the ability to talk to God. And we know some them are fakes. And we know that even the message of those that supposedly did talk to God have their messages changed and misinterpreted.

But then there is the Buddha. Was he born "enlightened"? Or become enlightened? Then he taught how others could become enlightened. That can't be true if the Baha'i Faith is right. So, I suppose, those teachings about the Buddha and Buddhism, for a Baha'i, must be wrong?

Then God should give everybody a divine mind so we can all understand him equally.

And, supposedly, God does increase the spiritual capacity of people. Why not to the point to where everyone can hear his voice directly.

Why should God do that?

Because it eliminates the middleman. So, maybe the messengers don't want God to do this, because then they wouldn't have a monopoly on God.

 

[muhammad_isa]

If God wants us to know what he wants, he should communicate with us in a way we can recognize..

We all recognise what we want to recognise.
If that wasn't the case, then we wouldn't be able to choose.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..is God then made up inside a person's head and then takes over their subconscious mind?

No. We certainly make things up, and our subconcious minds are capable of all sorts .. but it is not "G-d" that is made up.
Everybody is unique, and your generalisations do not explain why people have different creeds.

What can explain that, is mankind's tribal nature, amongst other things.

 

[Kfox]

Yeah, I'm thinking that people get their concepts and beliefs stuck in their head, and their thinking reflects that. And they can hear that little voice of God telling them what is right and what is wrong. If that little voice was consistent and the same for all people, then maybe there could be one God that is inside guiding people. But, since that voice is different for everybody, and depends on the beliefs that a person holds, then that voice is very possibly only in their head. So is God then made up inside a person's head and then takes over their subconscious mind?

I think people will do whatever it is they want to do, and if they are religious, they will figure out a way to justify their actions (whether those actions be good or bad) through scripture. Most Holy Books are written so vague that nearly any action can be justified according to it, and those well versed in their Holy Book are good at pointing to the parts that justify whatever it is they wanna do.

 

[Kfox]

We all recognise what we want to recognise.
If that wasn't the case, then we wouldn't be able to choose.

I was responding to someone else whose views are obviously different than yours concerning this issue.

 

[Trailblazer]

You said that we can prove to ourselves that a 'messenger' is true.

That truth is not objective truth.
Do you understand this?

Yes, I do understand. It is subjective truth.

I said: What is objectively true is true.
I did not say: What is subjectively true is not true.
Subjective truth could be true or false.

 

[Trailblazer]

If God wants us to know what he wants, he should communicate with us in a way we can recognize.

That is what God does.
God communicates through Messengers and people can recognize the messages.
If God communicated to people directly, people would never understand the message.

Not just me, most people.

No, you are wrong about that as the Messengers are credible to most people.

84 percent of the world population has a faith.
Because most faiths have a religious Founder or what I call a Messenger that means most people believe in God because of a Messenger. We know that Christians and Muslims believe in a Messenger and they comprise 55% of the world population. It does not matter if you call them a Messenger; they are holy men who founded the religions, so they are intermediaries between God and man. Sure, there are a few believers who believe in God but not a Messenger but that is not the norm. The point is that with no Messengers or holy men very few people would believe in God.

Why should God change His time-honored method of communication that has worked for most people just because a few atheists don't like Messengers?

According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (200 million convinced atheists). Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia

Mark Twain once said:
A foolish man's account of a wise man's words are never accurate because he has to translate the message in a way that he can understand it before passing it along to others.
I'm just saying God needs to quit depending on these fools to pass along his message, and pass it along himself. Yes! I said it; words of wisdom should come from the source; never second hand information.

The Messengers of God are not fools.
God has never passed anything along to anyone except His Messengers because they are the only ones who can hear God's Voice.

How important do you think you are that the Almighty God, the Creator of the entire universe, should speak to you directly?

 

[Trailblazer]

So God can make people with "divine" minds, but he makes most people without the ability to understand him directly. And makes them dependent on what others say?

That's right, and since God is the 'omnipotent' Creator it is God's prerogative to make people however He wants to make them.

 

[samtonga43]

Yes, I do understand. It is subjective truth.

I said: What is objectively true is true.
I did not say: What is subjectively true is not true.
Subjective truth could be true or false.

Exactly. Your belief that the B.man is a messenger of God could be true, or it could be false.