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

[TransmutingSoul]

Why do you think that? That would be circular reasoning. Moreover, anyone can make claims, as many false prophets do.
Baha'u'llah never said that His claims are the evidence that His claims are true. Rather He said:

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106

I see that the Person, the Life and the Words are the substance of the Claim, or in other words the evidence of the Claim.

The Claim is supported by those 3 aspects. So a Messenger is their Claim, the claim is judged by that evidence.

The False Messenger is the substance of their Claim.

So maybe we same the same thing in a different way. I am also just thinking is not creation circular? For instance can the seasons be seen as circular, the sun the planets the universe in a constant circular motion? The cycle of Revelation?

Regards Tony

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I need logic and evidence in order to believe.

Well, then the rest of us will do that differently, if we choose to and claim other versions of evidence and logic.

 

[Trailblazer]

I have heard of the concept of Angels and self appointed spokespeople or prophets and the like.

Messengers of God are not self appointed. They are appointed by God to speak for God.

“Know ye that I am afraid of none except God. In none but Him have I placed My trust; to none will I cleave but Him, and wish for naught except the thing He hath wished for Me. This, indeed, is My heart’s desire, did ye but know it. I have offered up My soul and My body as a sacrifice for God, the Lord of all worlds. Whoso hath known God shall know none but Him, and he that feareth God shall be afraid of no one except Him, though the powers of the whole earth rise up and be arrayed against him. I speak naught except at His bidding, and follow not, through the power of God and His might, except His truth. He, verily, shall recompense the truthful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 126

 

[Trailblazer]

So maybe we same the same thing in a different way.

Yes, I think that's it.

 

[Trailblazer]

I counted 7 claims you made just on this page?

I have made no claims at all. I have only stated beliefs. I never claimed that my beliefs are true.
What you listed are not claims, they are beliefs.

I suggest that you consult a dictionary.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
claim means - Google Search

Claim: to say that something is true or is a fact, although you cannot prove it and other people might not believe it: claim

Belief:
1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
"his belief in the value of hard work"

2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.
"a belief in democratic politics"

https://www.google.com/search

Belief:
the feeling of being certain that something exists or is true:

His belief in God gave him hope during difficult times.
Recent scandals have shaken many people's belief in (= caused people to have doubts about) politicians.

belief

 

[Trailblazer]

You have made many claims.

I'm not the only one to have pointed this out to you.

I have made no claims, I have only stated my beliefs.

Why would it matter if others agree that I have made claims? They are not claims, they are beliefs.

Psychologically I can explain why many atheists think that I am making claims.
Some atheists cannot imagine that I could have a belief and NOT claim it is true because they project their own arrogance onto me, thinking that if they believed something they would claiming it is true.

Also, you want to make my beliefs into claims so you can say I have the burden of proof, but it won't work because I am onto this game. I have no burden of proof because I am not trying to prove that my beliefs are true because that is not the job that Baha'u'llah gave me to do. Baha'u'llah said that everyone is responsible to investigate the truth for themselves.

“Bahá’u’lláh asked no one to accept His statements and His tokens blindly. On the contrary, He put in the very forefront of His teachings emphatic warnings against blind acceptance of authority, and urged all to open their eyes and ears, and use their own judgement, independently and fearlessly, in order to ascertain the truth. He enjoined the fullest investigation and never concealed Himself, offering, as the supreme proofs of His Prophethood, His words and works and their effects in transforming the lives and characters of men.”Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 8

“What does it mean to investigate reality? It means that man must forget all hearsay and examine truth himself, for he does not know whether statements he hears are in accordance with reality or not. Wherever he finds truth or reality, he must hold to it, forsaking, discarding all else; for outside of reality there is naught but superstition and imagination.” – Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 62.

 

[Trailblazer]

Beliefs are the affirmation of a claim.

No, beliefs are not the affirmation of a claim, not unless I am claiming that my beliefs are true.

affirmation
the action or process of affirming something or being affirmed.
affirmation definition - Google Search

I make no claims, I just have beliefs that I believe are true. I do not CLAIM that they are true.
What about the plain English language do you not understand?

 

[Trailblazer]

You are claiming that Baha'u'llah's claims are true.

No, I am not claiming that, I believe that.

Why can't you just accept what I say? I am claiming nothing.

Speaking for me and contradicting me constantly is arrogant to the hilt.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then you don't need evidence or logic. Have you claimed that?

I SAID I need logic and evidence in order to believe. I never CLAIMED that.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Messengers of God are not self appointed. They are appointed by God to speak for God.

“Know ye that I am afraid of none except God. In none but Him have I placed My trust; to none will I cleave but Him, and wish for naught except the thing He hath wished for Me. This, indeed, is My heart’s desire, did ye but know it. I have offered up My soul and My body as a sacrifice for God, the Lord of all worlds. Whoso hath known God shall know none but Him, and he that feareth God shall be afraid of no one except Him, though the powers of the whole earth rise up and be arrayed against him. I speak naught except at His bidding, and follow not, through the power of God and His might, except His truth. He, verily, shall recompense the truthful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 126

How would a neutral observer know the difference?

 

[Trailblazer]

Now that you've deliberately changed it by removing the word because, perhaps not, though I'm still dubious.

I did not deliberately do anything, I realized my mistake and I corrected it.

I also see no evidence demonstrated in either statement, and it certainly read like circular reasoning in the original post, but hey ho. More importantly you have tried to prove two unevidenced assertions, 1 That a deity exists, and 2 that there is evidence, by implying a third unevidenced assertion, 3 namely that a deity holds humans accountable.

No, I never asserted that a deity exists, I only ever SAID that I believe that a deity exists and I SAID I believe that there is evidence that a deity exists.

More importantly I have never tried to prove any assertions because I have no assertions, I only have beliefs.

Where is the evidence? bare assertions are not evidence, and you can't validate a bare assertion with another bare assertion, especially using the kind of circular reasoning fallacy in your original post.

I make no assertions. I told you what I believe is the evidence and you can take it or leave it.

I see no evidence at all, only a string of assertions, and the original claim amounted to circular reasoning, and using the word because, to link the unevidenced conclusion to the first two unevidenced assertions made that pretty obvious.

You see no evidence at all because you don't look at the evidence. Just like all atheists you completely blow off the only evidence that God ever provided and that is why you will always be atheists.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

ou see no evidence at all because you don't look at the evidence. Just like all atheists you completely blow off the only evidence that God ever provided and that is why you will always be atheists.

Unfortunately I consider holy texts and any assertions within to reflect the subjective experience of other people, quite separate from myself temporally and culturally. Quite separate experiences and very divergent understanding of the physical universe..

 

[Trailblazer]

@Sheldon

It's not evidence, it is a bare claim? You can't make a claim that there are "messengers of god" and expect anyone to just accept the bare claim prima facie, and the claim is not evidence of course.

I never said that the claim is evidence. I told you that the claim and the evidence are separate.

Well it is for the person making the claim a deity exists to demsonrate sufficient objective evidence for their belief, it is absurd ot expect someone who doesn't share the belief to tell you what evidence you should have.

I am not making a claim that a deity exists since I could never prove that, nobody can. I just have a belief that a deity exists, a belief that is based upon the evidence.

Again atheists don't believe in a any deity or deities, so asking there where the evidence for your belief should come form makes no sense?

That was a hypothetical question. IF a deity existed where would humans get the evidence for the deity?

Again there is no evidence in there only bare assertions, and again it seems like a circular reasoning fallacy to me, What objective evidence can you demsonrate that any deity holds humans accountable? You can't just assert this as if it is a fact.

There is no objective evidence and I was not asserting that as a fact, I only believe it to be true.

Well since atheists don't believe any deity exists, asking an atheist that questions seems rather pointless, don't you think?

Again, it was a hypothetical question just to get you to think.
IF God exists why would God expect us to believe He exists and provide no evidence? I think that would be unfair as well as unreasonable.

 

[Trailblazer]

How would a neutral observer know the difference?

He wouldn't know. He would have to do a lot of research in order to know and even after that he still might not know.

 

[Trailblazer]

Unfortunately I consider holy texts and any assertions within to reflect the subjective experience of other people, quite separate from myself temporally and culturally. Quite separate experiences and very divergent understanding of the physical universe..

The holy books are the only evidence that God exists so I guess you will have to settle for non-belief.

The Bible is not the only holy book that ever existed. Why do people believe that?
Other holy books have been written since the Bible was recorded.

“…….. Once in about a thousand years shall this City be renewed and readorned…

That City is none other than the Word of God revealed in every age and dispensation. In the days of Moses it was the Pentateuch; in the days of Jesus, the Gospel; in the days of Muhammad, the Messenger of God, the Qur’án; in this day, the Bayán; and in the Dispensation of Him Whom God will make manifest, His own Book—the Book unto which all the Books of former Dispensations must needs be referred, the Book that standeth amongst them all transcendent and supreme.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 269-270

From: Tablet of the True Seeker

 

[TransmutingSoul]

How would a neutral observer know the difference?

How do we determine and legal case, is it not by looking at the evidence provided?

In the case of a Messenger they offer they are the proof of God and if we do not meet or know them, then what they leave is the Testomony.

That is the only evidence we will find of God, but interestingly it is all reflected and supported by this material creation.

Regards Tony

 

[Sheldon]

The claims are the evidence.

Claim
verb
1. state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.

Evidence
noun

1. the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Claims are not evidence...

Why did a Messenger from God come?

I don't believe that bare claim, so whatever assumptions you make about it are moot.

That is the evidence,

That is a long list of bare assertions, you demonstrated no evidence. I have a hard time believing you were in earnest with that nonsense.

 

[Tiberius]

Yes, there is no one methodology for all of the everyday world even for science:
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/whatisscience_12

And you'll notice that the things that science doesn't do, according to that page, are all things that are SUBJECTIVE.

But when it comes to learning OBJECTIVE truths about the world, then science is the best tool we have. I'd even say it is the ONLY tool we have.

As for wrong there seems to be different and not same meanings:
Definition of WRONG

I don't see any contradiction in those definitions. Could you point the contradiction out to me?

 

[Tiberius]

How subjective of you.

Subjective? Like expecting others to go by your standards instead of their own?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

What would be evidence of God's existence? Why, that's simple: anything that can be shown to be true, but which has no possible explanation other than God.

Now, would that include a "messenger from God," as asked in the OP?

Sure, as long you can show that:

• this is, actually, a messenger from God, rather than some deluded human who thinks that's what he is,
• that he has God's message correctly, and
• that it doesn't conflict with the message from another such messenger, since while there may be two messengers, there's only one God, who surely would not contradict Himself

Anybody got such evidence? Many of us would love to see it -- and I think are honest enough (in spite of @Link's insistence that there are no "honest" atheists) to give it a fair examination.