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

[Aupmanyav]

@F1fan, people do not do things without a reason. You have your reasons to post, I have mine and Trailblazer has her own. However, I wonder what can these reasons be?

I will leave the children to play in the schoolyard. I have more important things to do.

Like what? Feeding your legion of cats?

 

[F1fan]

I never said that claims are evidence.
I never said that beliefs are evidence.
I never said that other people saying something it true is evidence

Over and over and over again I have said that none of the above is evidence of any kind

If people believe how you just tried to misrepresent my position that is their prerogative. I could not care less what those people think.

When you post your prophet as if that is evidence, then you are doing this.You only rely on your beliefs and what your prophet says as evidence. And you just said none of it is valid.

 

[Trailblazer]

@F1fan, people do not do things without a reason. You have your reasons to post, I have mine and Trailblazer has her own. However, I wonder what can that be?

You tell me and then we will both know.

Like what? Feeding your legion of cats?

Not only that but a legion of raccoons!

You don't think I have better things to do than this? I have plenty of things I should be doing but instead I am here.
Only God or a good psychiatrist would know why.

 

[F1fan]

@F1fan, people do not do things without a reason. You have your reasons to post, I have mine and Trailblazer has her own. However, I wonder what can that be?Like what? Feeding your legion of cats?

Dude, I just fed the cats.

Oh wait, they want their daily meat. I'll be back. Probably. Wish me luck.

 

[Trailblazer]

You only rely on your beliefs and what your prophet says as evidence.

Only AFTER I looked at the evidence and determined that He was a Manifestation of God did I believe that what He wrote is true.

 

[F1fan]

Admittedly, my criteria are based upon who I believe were Messengers of God.

All belief is uncertain. So you could be mistaken, yes?

My criteria criteria imply that a person must be a "Messenger of God if they met my criteria because I believe that any men who met my criteria were Messengers of God. In other words, unless they met all these minimum criteria they could not have been Messengers of God, according to my beliefs about what a Messenger of God is and what He does.

Shouldn't a criteria be objective and stringent, and not be personal belief to assure bias isn't rigging the qualification?

 

[F1fan]

Only AFTER I looked at the evidence and determined that He was a Manifestation of God did I believe that what He wrote is true.

So what do you do when others disagree with you and point out your flaws in thinking?

We don't care about your beliefs, we care about facts and objectivity.

Plus, are you back to belief in God instead of knowing God exists?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I did not abuse a definition, I just posted a dictionary definition. I can find some other dictionary definitions if you want me to.

Lots of times I am wrong, but in this case you are wrong and I am right. All knowledge is not demonstrable.
Why not just man up and admit you are wrong. It would not kill you. Some knowledge is demonstrable but all knowledge is not demonstrable.

Yes, you did. And a dictionary cannot help you. You need a deeper work. Dictionaries are for when one is just beginning to understand words.

When it comes to knowledge and if you know something or not you need epistemology. This link is to an article on epistemology. I linked to where it goes over knowing facts. You know the video that I linked. It pretty much agrees with it:

Epistemology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Therefore, knowledge requires a third element, one that excludes the aforementioned luck, and so that involves S’s belief being, in some sense, justifiably or appropriately held. If we take these three conditions on knowledge to be not merely necessary but also sufficient, then: S knows that p if and only if p is true and S justifiably believes that p. According to this account, the three conditions—truth, belief, and justification—are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge of facts.[16]

 

[CG Didymus]

TB?

Short for Trailblazer.

 

[CG Didymus]

It is absolutely untrue that I bring it up.

All I do is respond to posts, day in day out, and I am sick to death of it.
It was not ME who turned this thread into an 'evidence for the Baha'i Faith' thread.
The evidence that it was not me who did that is right on this thread.

It is unjust to accuse people of things they did not do.

Really? Eight posts of yours mentioning Baha'u'llah or the Baha'i Faith before the first person mentioned Baha'u'llah, and that was Unveiled Artist. And she mentioned him in response to what you said in one of your posts. I think, which means I have a "belief" that it is you that first mentioned Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith. But now, I'm not so sure. 'Cause I'm completely confident in your ability to find a way to "prove" what you believe is the truth.

But, you know what, why do you act as if that is something bad? You are a Baha'i and are supposed to be spreading the word. Why pretend that you aren't trying to do that? Lots of people here on the forum know a lot about the Baha'i Faith, and some for the first time, because of you. You should be proud of yourself. But, instead, you say it is "absolutely untrue"? And you have "evidence" right here on this thread? And it is "unjust" to accuse you of doing something you did not do? And that something is bringing up the Baha'i Faith and Baha'u'llah? Okay, if you have "evidence" I guess that "proves" it. Sorry, I was wrong.

 

[CG Didymus]

As I just said to you, I believe there is only one true God, the God who sends Messengers in every age. All these Messengers are evidence of God because they all represent God in this contingent world. I believe all those Messengers were sent by the one true God, who reveals more truth progressively throughout the ages. I follow Baha'u'llah because He brought the message that is pertinent to the age we are living in.

Perhaps the diagram below will help you better understand what I believe.

View attachment 56044

Where did the person that made that graph get his information? Or is it just a guesstimate?

There was approximately 420 years between their births. Abraham was born in about 1946 BC and died in about 1771 BC. Moses was born in about 1526 BC and died in about 1406 BC.

Consequently, there was about 245 years between the death of Abraham and the birth of Moses.​

 

[CG Didymus]

Are you familiar with Christian Science? If not, Google is your friend.

I think you misunderstand what we're doing here. I'm not making a case that Mary Baker Eddy is a "Messenger of God;" I'm asking you to make the case that only the people you consider to be "Messengers" meet your criteria.

I think that Mary Baker Eddy is a useful test case, because at least at face value, she ticks all the boxes.

If you aren't game, then we could explore something else... such as why you think that your criteria imply that a person must be a "Messenger of God."

I complain all the time to the Baha'is that Abraham and Moses don't fit their criteria. Both had character flaws. But I don't think that's not a problem for Jews or Christians, because they don't make them "manifestations" of God like the Baha'is do.

 

[CG Didymus]

@Trailblazer - you know what? I've had a change of heart. Instead, let's explore why you keep on making these threads.

Why do you:

- create a thread about atheists and their beliefs,

- steer the conversation so that the thread becomes all about you and your beliefs,

- weirdly insist that you haven't steered the thread to make it all about you,

- repeat the whole process a few months later as if you didn't learn a single thing from all the times you did this before?

What do you get out of it?

Yeah, I checked to see who "steered" the conversation to be about the Baha'i Faith. It was her. Eight posts before someone other than her mentioned Baha'u'llah. And, naturally, she denied it.

 

[Trailblazer]

All belief is uncertain.

Hypothetically speaking, any belief could be wrong, not just a religious belief. The belief that the there will not be a major catastrophe that wipes out 2/3 of the world population could be wrong.

So you could be mistaken, yes?

Anyone could be mistaken. Is there a reason why you want me to say I could be mistaken? What I say will not make any difference because if I am mistaken I am mistaken and if I am not mistaken I am not mistaken. It really does not matter because what I say does not make anything true. A belief is either true or false.

Shouldn't a criteria be objective and stringent, and not be personal belief to assure bias isn't rigging the qualification?

The criteria has to be based upon something known. I did not just make up my criteria out of thin air. Since I believe I know who the true Messengers of God were that is what I base my criteria upon in order to determine who would qualify as a true Messenger. For example, since I believe that Moses and Jesus Muhammad were true Messengers met all the criteria I listed, I would expect any Messengers who came after them to meet the same criteria, since I believe there are certain criteria all true Messengers have to meet. My criteria are based upon history and who I believe the true Messengers were.

I believe my criteria is fair because it takes all the Messengers of God and thus all the religions into account.

 

[CG Didymus]

- steer the conversation so that the thread becomes all about you and your beliefs,

That is a false accusation. I did not steer the conversation to be about my beliefs. The very last thing I want to do is talk about my beliefs. All you have to do is read on this thread to see how it ended up being about my beliefs. It was other people who steered it that way. All I did was respond to the posts that were posted to me. I have done nothing but answer posts since I started this thread. I was really sorry I ever posted this thread after I realized that I would have so many posts to answer.

These are all posts by you. I think there is eight of them that mention the Baha'i Faith or Baha'u'llah. All these were posted before anyone asked you about the Baha'i Faith or Baha'u'llah. Again, you're a Baha'i. Why wouldn't you try and steer the conversation towards your religion? Why are you accusing people of false accusations?
↑
“Whoso maketh efforts for Us,” he shall enjoy the blessings conferred by the words: “In Our Ways shall We assuredly guide him.”” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 266-267
↑
The scriptures that the Messengers reveal are accessible to everyone.
↑
I did not say that everyone will find the scriptures convincing...
I would not be convinced by the Bible but I was convinced by the Writings of Baha'u'llah because it is first person and it is not anecdotes.
↑
There are facts and there is information that indicate that my belief is true.
↑
Admittedly, Baha'is have a responsibility to carry the message of Baha'u'llah but after that has been done our work is done, unless people have questions.

I talk to them because they talk to me
↑
One of those messengers did predict that certain things would happen on such and such dates...
↑
I was referring to predictions made by a Messenger of God.

You said: One of those messengers should predict that it will happen on such and such dates...
I said: One of those messengers did predict that certain things would happen on such and such dates...

The name of that Messenger was Baha'u'llah. Baha’u’llah predicted many things that later came to pass. In this book, which can be read online, is a list of 30 specific things Baha’u’llah predicted that later came to pass: The Challenge of Baha'u'llah
↑
God cannot come down to earth to verify that His Messenger is actually a Messenger
↑
The Baháʼí teachings state that there is only one God and that his essence is absolutely inaccessible from the physical realm of existence and that, therefore, his reality is completely unknowable. Thus, all of humanity's conceptions of God which have been derived throughout history are mere manifestations of the human mind and not at all reflective of the nature of God's essence. While God's essence is inaccessible, a subordinate form of knowledge is available by way of mediation by divine messengers, known as Manifestations of God.

God in the Baháʼí Faith
↑
they are not prophecies that were written for the purpose of Baha'u'llah proving He was a Prophet/Messenger of God. Rather, they were predictions that He made during the course of His life. For some people those predictions constitute evidence that Baha'u'llah was a Prophet/Messenger of God, but that is not why they were revealed.

Everything that Baha'u'llah predicted came true because He was inerrant. It is all recorded in history so it can easily be proven.
↑
Bahá’u’lláh asked no one to accept His statements and His tokens blindly.
↑
we shall endeavor to show whether Bahá’u’lláh’s claim to Prophethood stands or falls by application of these tests: whether the things that He had spoken have followed and come to pass,

 

[QuestioningMind]

Nope.

I am just saying you should explain how a universe can be created within the universe on the earth for you to see because that's what you asked for. And I asked for what kind of logical axioms you value or agree to.

It is you who tried to define this so called creator to suit your terms. Read your post carefully.

It is you who tried to define this so called creator to suit your terms. Read your post carefully.

Yes, I DID define it to suit my terms, but because you repeatedly refused to define it yourself, leaving me free to define it however I might choose. And NOW you're complaining that I went and defined this being myself.

The only reason I used that absurd example was to try and demonstrate how illogical it is for you to ask me what specific evidence I would need to believe in a creator being while refusing to give me ANY specifics about this proposed creator being.

 

[Trailblazer]

So what do you do when others disagree with you and point out your flaws in thinking?

Nothing, unless I think there are flaws in my thinking, in which case I change my thinking. Other people might see something I did not see but they are not really qualified to identify my flaws nor am I qualified to identify their flaws. Moreover, pointing out other people's flaws is no way to interact on a forum. Disagreeing with one's beliefs and explaining what like @Nimos does is acceptable, but there is no need to make it personal. It serves no useful purpose.

We don't care about your beliefs, we care about facts and objectivity.

The only facts I have are the facts about Baha'u'llah and the history of His Cause.

Plus, are you back to belief in God instead of knowing God exists?

Why split hairs, believe and know are just words and they mean different things to different people. When some people say they believe they might have a weak belief so they are uncertain, but when someone is certain of their beliefs then they might say they know. There was a time a few years ago when I believed, but thanks to all the atheists and Christians I have posted to now I know. The irony is that people think they can weaken my beliefs by attacking them but the opposite happens because the more they attack my beliefs the more research I do to defend their attacks and lo! I uncover even more reasons why my beliefs have to be right.

 

[Trailblazer]

When it comes to knowledge and if you know something or not you need epistemology.

Scientific knowledge and knowledge of history and all other subjects related to life in the material world can be obtained in college... I already spent 20 years of my life pursuing that kind of knowledge and I finally realized it was not that important in the overall scheme of things. That is why I returned to my religion.

Knowledge about God comes from God through the Manifestations of God so I get it my reading what Baha'u'llah wrote.

“The beginning of all things is the knowledge of God, and the end of all things is strict observance of whatsoever hath been sent down from the empyrean of the Divine Will that pervadeth all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 5

 

[Truthseeker]

I was specifically looking for this.

"Your own Qur'an says that the Qur'an itself is the greatest proof of the validity of the Message from God."

But that's fine. Thanks for those verses. Different translation I dont think I have ever seen.

Thanks! I knew that passage was there somewhere. That hits the spot better. I use a search engine to try to find the appropriate passage, but I don't know the Qur'an like you do.

 

[firedragon]

It is you who tried to define this so called creator to suit your terms. Read your post carefully.

Yes, I DID define it to suit my terms, but because you repeatedly refused to define it yourself, leaving me free to define it however I might choose. And NOW you're complaining that I went and defined this being myself.

The only reason I used that absurd example was to try and demonstrate how illogical it is for you to ask me what specific evidence I would need to believe in a creator being while refusing to give me ANY specifics about this proposed creator being.

Anyway, so how do you think a universe would fit in within this universe? How would it begin? Will there be another singularity and what would that do to the place you think it would be done?

I am testing the request logically. You probably know that your expectation was not logical or rational so that's why you are trying ad hominem rather than responding logically.

I asked you what axioms in logic you stand with and you have refused to respond several times. So either you dont know what axioms you stand with, or you dont understand it. But you respond with this kind of ad hominem which is to try to address me and my views rather than engage with the argument. I just said that because a lot of people seem to think that ad hominem is insults, which is not necessarily.