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

[rational experiences]

The human teachings said man as a babies mother ovah ovary had been healed in God heavenly conditions. Baby life of man in DNA given back.

Human mother highest conscious life reviewed.

The conditions cooling of gases by ice and water the teaching.

The UFO God ark stone attack by breaking gods mountain laws. Mountain not a volcano where theists discussing gods heavens as a spirit began. Lied.

Gods earth hell. Satanists theist liars.

Evolution immaculate the only earth God accepted beginning.

No other status was allowed.

As the coldest heavenly state spirit kept life safe from burning.

Ice one saviour returned and renewed end of each year a balance.

Water melt flooded ice raining flooding was still in fact cooling the heavens ancient gas burning. Flooding rain also a saviour.

Heated gases had disallowed human life genetic blood type to exist. By heavenly support. Holy life blood taught.

As reptile egg layers dinosaurs owned cold blood in an extremely hot heavens status.

What you knew in human sciences.

Holy life with god origins the human holy mother of human babies.

Ignored as usual.

Holy human mother the human creator life saved continuance a science teaching about holy life with god. Evolution cooled gas status.

 

[Tiberius]

Religion is not science so different people will view a religious belief differently. People are not going to view the objective facts of the Baha'i Faith the same way. Some people will think these facts mean Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God and some people will think they mean nothing. How they will view the evidence all depends upon that person's childhood upbringing, education, and life experiences to date.

Bringing up scientific things is the red herring fallacy as well as the fallacy of false equivalence. The reason I know so many fallacies is because so many atheists commit them so I have learned over many years what they are

As long as you continue to commit the fallacy of false equivalence by conflating science and religion I cannot reach your mind. It is hopeless.

I see you are still clinging to religious belief as the only justification for what you want to believe is true.

I am not measuring whether it exists in reality, I am determining whether it exists in reality.

Which requires measurement. Otherwise, how can you show it's existence isn't zero?

Why would I seek evidence that did not support my belief if I was investigating my belief?

In order to get an unbiased view!

If I want to get evidence that licorice is the worst thing ever made, I can certainly find a lot, and if I only look at evidence that says licorice is the worst thing ever, then I'm going to come away thinking that all the evidence shows how bad licorice is. And then when I get into the real world and find all those people who love the stuff, I'm going to be shocked, I'm going to tell them that they are wrong and they just haven't realised it yet.

Meanwhile, someone who wants to get evidence that licorice is the best will find plenty of evidence for that view, and reach the exact opposite conclusion to me.

Tell me, do you think either of us got an accurate reflection of reality? Because I don't!

That would be like a Christian looking at the Qur'an to support their belief. It is patently illogical. A Christian is going to look at the Bible because that is the evidence that supports a belief in Christianity.

How do you not see that only seeking things that support your view is NOT going to give you an unbiased opinion?

If I look for evidence that God doesn't exist, and only seek evidence that shows that God doesn't exist, I'm not going to get a balanced view on the issue of God's existence, am I?

Yes, but there is no list. You would have to read about the true Messengers and see how they met the criteria.

So, yes, there are criteria set by the Baha'i council, but there's no list of criteria.

How does that work?

You are absolutely correct, so where so we go from here? Why would agreement be necessary?

Because if we are looking at ANYTHING that actually exists in reality, then there will be agreement.

The fact that there is no agreement does not fit with the "God is real" point of view, but it is exactly what we'd expect if God was imaginary.

How did you come to your belief and why did you relinquish it>?

I was raised with it. I discarded it when I studied it and found there is no actual evidence for God.

 

[Tiberius]

Religion can be used to benefit people or it can be used to manipulate and control people.

Yes, that is the claim I made.

It does not change anything. The fact that religion has been an important part of all great civilisations (Great meaning large or immense, we use it in the pejorative sense) does not reflect on the accuracy of it.

We are not trying to get it to fit into all the previous Messengers. Just because we believe in the Messenger that came before that does not mean they fit with the Baha'i Faith. As Jesus said, you cannot put old wine in new wine sacs lest they burst the sacs.

Yes, you are trying to fit the existence of previous messengers into your religious beliefs.

No, it is only a claim if someone is claiming something. All of the Writings of Baha'u'llah are not claims but I believe they are all truth.

And you are claiming they are all truth.

That's a CLAIM, you know.

 

[Tiberius]

Okay, I will use real, but it also applies to your truth.

Now that which is imagined is not real, right? But it is real, that you can imagine something. So now do something real, imagine a pond. In the pond are 2 ducks, a real duck and a non-real duck, since it is a decoy duck, but it is a real decoy duck.

So here it is in somewhat fancy words. Truth and real are cultural words, which are norms for saying that someone have trust in and accepts. They are cognitive judgments about comparison of different ways of thinking about different experiences.
But for the problem of justification of what you claim that you can justify in regards to the problems in epistemology, that is something else.
So you have this problem:

It is true and real according to your true and real, that my true and real are not true and real, but it is true and real I can think and act different than you and indeed I have do so with this post. So is limited cognitive relativism true and real? Or are you the only true and real source of how to understand the world and I am not true and real?

The imagining is real.

The thing that is imagined is not necessarily real.

I fail to see your point.

 

[rational experiences]

When the church who wrote the updated bible no man is God. Do not give God a name. Satan in various positions was machine theists lies.

Cosmic detail.

Galileo was lie gaol.

As the church said earth had the sun rotate around it was relativity as only O was God whole as one side of earth as DD faced the light. God constant.

Was not theoretical lying.

Earth was the centre of earths owned uni verse.

The sun was the centre of its universe only owning it's body in hell self consuming. With stars falling.

Gods the planets were self owned not the sun in any theme earths science.

So how you read then preach your verdict of past written teaching was nothing like how ancient scholars taught earth relativity.

Galileo was in fact wrong writing satanic ideas.

As the Church founded on earths to mans conscious head advice....they were not a nuclear physicist looking for a machine reactive explanation.

Nuclear and time shifting themes.

Why you are wrong to have believed they were not telling earth life relativity just earth correctly when they were.

 

[Trailblazer]

I see you are still clinging to religious belief as the only justification for what you want to believe is true.

I am doing anything but clinging but I cannot disbelieve in something that I know is the truth.

Why would I want to believe in a God I do not even like?
Why would I want to believe in a religion that has so many requirements for which I get nothing in return?
I want to be a Baha'i like I want a hole in the head.

Which requires measurement. Otherwise, how can you show it's existence isn't zero?

God cannot be measured because God is not physical.

In order to get an unbiased view!

If I want to get evidence that licorice is the worst thing ever made, I can certainly find a lot, and if I only look at evidence that says licorice is the worst thing ever, then I'm going to come away thinking that all the evidence shows how bad licorice is. And then when I get into the real world and find all those people who love the stuff, I'm going to be shocked, I'm going to tell them that they are wrong and they just haven't realised it yet.

Meanwhile, someone who wants to get evidence that licorice is the best will find plenty of evidence for that view, and reach the exact opposite conclusion to me.

Tell me, do you think either of us got an accurate reflection of reality? Because I don't!

Fair enough. Many people look at the evidence against the belief when they are investigating it, before they join the religion. Many Baha'is did that, they compared the Baha'i Faith to other religions or looked at the evidence against the belief.

How do you not see that only seeking things that support your view is NOT going to give you an unbiased opinion?

If I look for evidence that God doesn't exist, and only seek evidence that shows that God doesn't exist, I'm not going to get a balanced view on the issue of God's existence, am I?

I was not referring to looking only at things that support my view of God vs. no God, I was talking about where i would get accurate information abut the religion in question. A Christian would not look at the Qur'an to get information about Christianity.

So, yes, there are criteria set by the Baha'i council, but there's no list of criteria.

How does that work?

There are no criteria set by the Baha'i council.

Because if we are looking at ANYTHING that actually exists in reality, then there will be agreement.

The fact that there is no agreement does not fit with the "God is real" point of view, but it is exactly what we'd expect if God was imaginary.

No, that is illogical because there is no reason to think that humans would agree on religion. Do people agree on politics? Politics exist in reality.

However, 93% of the world population agree that a God or gods exist.

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

I am not saying that means that God exists so please do not accuse me of the ad populum fallacy.

I was raised with it. I discarded it when I studied it and found there is no actual evidence for God.

I was not raised in any religion so I had no confirmation bias since I had no belief in God before that. I was starting from scratch.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, that is the claim I made.

It does not change anything. The fact that religion has been an important part of all great civilisations (Great meaning large or immense, we use it in the pejorative sense) does not reflect on the accuracy of it.

I do not know what you mean by accuracy. If you mean it does not prove that God exists, yes and no. If you use your logical reasoning then you would ask yourself how religion could be the cause of great civilizations and the motivating force behind so much human behavior if there was no real God behind it.

Yes, you are trying to fit the existence of previous messengers into your religious beliefs.

Please explain how you think I am doing that. Just because I believe that the previous Messengers were sent by God that does not mean I am trying to make them FIT into the Baha'i Faith. Every Messenger has His own distinct mission from God and founds a new religion. All these religions are like chapters in one continually unfolding Book of God, all separate but connected in, all part of God's Purpose for man.

And you are claiming they are all truth.

That's a CLAIM, you know.

I said: "All of the Writings of Baha'u'llah are not claims but I believe they are all truth."
What I have is a belief.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=claim+means

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

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

How are you defining real?

That which matters in a given context.

 

[CG Didymus]

No, you have made unevidenced claims, facts by definition contain knowledge based on reality, you've presented nothing close to this.



I am dubious about this claim as well, but even were they credible historical facts, they axiomatically cannot evidence a deity or anything supernatural.

It might not be as bad as what Christians expect people to believe, but it is still the person that took the title "Baha'u'llah" said things and did things that cause some people to believe he was God's messenger/manifestation. But there's also somethings that raise doubts.

With Christians they can say look at what the eyewitness accounts say... He was born of a virgin. The Magi followed a star to where he was born. He healed people of leprosy and other things. He freakin walked on water. But then, he came out of the tomb and then, while people watched, ascended into the clouds. Surely, Jesus was God's son.

Yes, great eyewitness proof. If they were telling the truth. And probably better than the Baha'is proof... But is there reason to doubt it? Yes, and, when it comes to the Christian proofs, even Baha'is doubt it and say most of those things didn't really happen and are quite sure, with the resurrection that Jesus died and stayed dead... And they use scientific knowledge to justify that belief... that once a person is dead, and dead for three days, they don't come back to life.

But that's what religious believers do... Their stuff is the truth. The beliefs of the other religions aren't.

 

[CG Didymus]

I do not ASSERT that a deity exists because I could never prove it.... all I have is evidence that indicates it.

Oh behave, that ship sailed some time ago, and you disrespect both me and yourself with this absurd claim, read a dictionary for goodness sake.

I haven't read ahead yet, but let me guess... When you said "absurd claim" she's going to say she claims nothing... It is a "belief".

 

[CG Didymus]

There is no objective evidence for a deity. You have no idea how ridiculous you sound when you request that kind of evidence.
Carry on.

What's more ridiculous to claim there is an invisible, unknowable, unprovable deity or to ask for objective proof of one? And why do we reject the Sun God or the Fertility God? Because we believe those people made those God's up. They were very real to them. They prayed to them. Sacrificed people and animals to them. And they had "evidence" that those God's were real. Like when they cut out the heart of a virgin, the next spring all their crops grew. Or when the Wind God was angry and they prayed and fasted, and the winds subsided. Coincidence? They didn't think so.

 

[CG Didymus]

The words and meanings are mutually exclusive by definition unless one tries to conflate them.

Claim: state or assert that something is the case, typically without providing evidence or proof.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=claim+means

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

Why not just claim you believe in God? You believe it. You assert it. You claim it. You've looked at the proof and evidence provided by Baha'u'llah and trust him and saw what he went through in his life and have come to the conclusion he is telling the truth... He is the manifestation of God for this day. You've read his writings and no ordinary man could have written such things.

You're a Baha'is. We expect you to believe it and claim it is true. And, of course, we don't and will continue to grill you as to why you believe him.

 

[Sheldon]

Are you on this forum for a constructive dialogue or just to play around with definitions in an effort to prove you are right and I am wrong?
I don't have time for the latter or any interest in it.

Well you are free to do what you want of course, but you were demonstrably making claims, and it's just my subjective opinion of course, but when one is inevitably shown to be wrong about something, then one should have the grace to accept it., and try and learn from it. However if being right is that important to you , that you want to redefine the dictionary, then perhaps debate is something you should avoid? Either way it is your call.

I don't attach a great deal of importance to being right in the general run of things, as that will be the case sometimes, but not others, but I do care that what I believe is true, so I strive to subject beliefs to critical scrutiny.

FYI, I didn't write the dictionary either, so you're just shooting the messenger here, sorry if that upsets you but I can't do anything about that, and your claims can be debated the same as anyone else's here, one assumes?

 

[Sheldon]

I believe that a deity exists is not an assertion that a deity exists, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Until you state the belief, as you have done here repeatedly, then it is by definition an assertion. You're arguing against the dictionary, as I demonstrated. If it upsets you this much to find out you were wrong about something you can just ignore my posts, but that won't change the facts of course. Personally when I inevitably realise I am wrong about something, I'm glad, as it means I've learned something new, and I need all the help I can get.

However stating a belief publicly is an assertion or claim that it is true.

 

[CG Didymus]

How do you KNOW that Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses were not perfectly polished mirrors, and what does that even mean? It could mean different things to different people depending upon how they interpret it. Do you see the problem? The other problem is that you have to choose: Are you going to believe what the Bible says or are you going to believe what Baha'u'llah wrote? Which rendition of these Prophets do YOU believe is more accurate, scriptures written over 3000 years ago by unnamed men or scriptures written 150 years ago by Baha'u'llah in His own pen?

Hmmm? Perfectly polished mirror? That's a Baha'i term. I would think that a manifestation is a perfect reflection of the attributes of God.

And yes I'm going to believe what the Bible says is what those writers wanted us to believe. If it's not true, I'm good with that. But it's your religion that claims, asserts that they were manifestations. Why would the Baha'i Faith say such a thing. First, assuming these people were real, what does the Bible story say about them? Adam... disobeyed God and got cursed. But the story sounds like myth. Noah obeyed God and built a big boat... and lived over 900 years? Okay, this story sounds like myth. Abraham... obeyed the voice of God and took his son Isaac to be sacrificed. I'd say this is myth too. Moses... parted the seas, had his cane turn into a snake. Sounds mythical. So were they real? Were they manifestations? I don't see why they need to be... except for Baha'is, who need a progression of manifestations.

In the stories about all these mythical characters, they all had human character flaws. Do manifestations have character flaws? They all made wrong decisions, some told lies, one killed a man, is this something that a manifestation would do?

And no, I don't believe Baha'u'llah is accurate in some of the things he said. That is why I don't believe he is the return of every promised one of every religion. He said Ishmael, not Isaac, was taken to be sacrificed? He says that Noah was 950 years old, but in his version of the story, he doesn't mention the flood... which was the main event in the Bible version of the story. To me, why change a story that was probably fictional anyway? It was fiction. But, if Baha'u'llah is saying that those stories were true, but that the Bible writers changed them, then that makes the Bible writers liars. Then the Bible is not the "greatest" testimony.

Now I can see why you and others have come to believe him, because some of the beliefs and claims of the Baha'i Faith sounds pretty good. That's fine. Believe it. Live it. Promote it. Apply the principals of the Faith to help bring peace to the world. But, with some of the beliefs and claims of the Baha'i Faith, expect to get questioned.

 

[Trailblazer]

What's more ridiculous to claim there is an invisible, unknowable, unprovable deity or to ask for objective proof of one?

What's more ridiculous than to EXPECT to have objective proof of an invisible entity? NOTHING.

I make no claim that God exists since I cannot prove it, It is as simple as that.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why not just claim you believe in God? You believe it. You assert it. You claim it.

I believe that God exists but I do not assert it or claim it since I cannot prove it.
How many more times do I have to repeat myself?

You're a Baha'is. We expect you to believe it and claim it is true. And, of course, we don't and will continue to grill you as to why you believe him.

I believe that Baha'u'llah's claim is true, but I do not claim it is true because I canoe prove it to anyone except myself.

 

[Sheldon]

What's more ridiculous than to EXPECT to have objective proof of an invisible entity? NOTHING.

Electricity can't be seen, and we can demonstrate objective evidence that exists.

I make no claim that God exists since I cannot prove it, It is as simple as that.

A belief is defined as the acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

If you assert that belief here, as you have done repeatedly that is demonstrably a claim, which is defined as to state or assert that something is the case, (and again) typically without providing evidence or proof..

 

[Sheldon]

I believe that God exists but I do not assert it or claim it since I cannot prove it.

Belief
noun

1. an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof.

Assert
verb

1. state a fact or belief confidently and forcefully.

How many more times do I have to repeat myself?

There is no time limit on this being wrong, I'm not sure why you expect these claims to go unchallenged.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hmmm? Perfectly polished mirror? That's a Baha'i term. I would think that a manifestation is a perfect reflection of the attributes of God.

And yes I'm going to believe what the Bible says is what those writers wanted us to believe. If it's not true, I'm good with that. But it's your religion that claims, asserts that they were manifestations. Why would the Baha'i Faith say such a thing.

Why would the Baha'i Faith say such a thing? Because it is in the Writings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.
What is a perfectly polished mirror? A mirror that reflects the attributes of God. That is all it is. Many ordinary human beings reflect God's attributes but not perfectly.

“Whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth is a direct evidence of the revelation within it of the attributes and names of God, inasmuch as within every atom are enshrined the signs that bear eloquent testimony to the revelation of that Most Great Light. Methinks, but for the potency of that revelation, no being could ever exist. How resplendent the luminaries of knowledge that shine in an atom, and how vast the oceans of wisdom that surge within a drop! To a supreme degree is this true of man, who, among all created things, hath been invested with the robe of such gifts, and hath been singled out for the glory of such distinction. For in him are potentially revealed all the attributes and names of God to a degree that no other created being hath excelled or surpassed. All these names and attributes are applicable to him.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 177

“And of all men, the most accomplished, the most distinguished, and the most excellent are the Manifestations of the Sun of Truth. Nay, all else besides these Manifestations, live by the operation of Their Will, and move and have their being through the outpourings of Their grace.” Gleanings, p. 179