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

[Trailblazer]

Evidence is a weakness for most religious beliefs.

but not a weakness for mine.

 

[Subduction Zone]

and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person. means that the proof of the truth - that He had a Mission from God - is who He was as a Person, as demonstrated by what He did on His Mission.

I cannot explain all of that in a post. There is too much.

Who Baha'u'llah was as a Person, His character (qualities) can be determined by reading about Him in books such as the following: The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4

What Baha'u'llah did on His Mission on earth can be determined by reading about His mission in books such as the following:

God Passes By (1844-1944)
The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4, which cover the 40 years of His Mission, from 1853-1892.

That's how people learn things, they read books. All of this is now online free to read or download.
The Baha'i Faith is a very organized religion and all information about it is public and easy to locate.

I have a feeling that you cannot demonstrate it at all. Break it down into pieces and see if they add up. if one can develop a pattern of observations you may be able to provide some evidence. Disparate claims are not evidence on their own. You would need something to tie them together.

 

[Subduction Zone]

but not a weakness for mine.

So far it has been. As people have explained to you again and again. It is very easy to fool ourselves. And it is not that hard to fool a few others. It is very hard to fool everyone.

 

[Trailblazer]

How do you "prove to yourself" that which can't be proven?

It seems like you're saying you can do the impossible.

It can be proven to oneself if one looks at the evidence that supports the claims of Baha'u'llah and connects the dots. I am not saying it is easy, but it can be done. God has never been much for making things easy.

 

[firedragon]

He did have a question there. You seemed to have ignored it.

I answered it already SZ. To another person. So he just has to read up. If he is not capable of doing that, cannot be assisted.

 

[Trailblazer]

Did you just claim that claiming god is the exception is not special pleading because it is god, and he is the exception?
Genius!

Absolutely! And if you knew anything about God you would know why.

How can you know that God is not an exception unless you know something about God? Atheists are so much fun. They talk about God as if they know something about God.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception.[1][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading

God IS the exception to every generally accepted rule and that is why the special pleading fallacy does not apply to God.

Your assertion that "God IS the exception to every generally accepted rule" IS special pleading.

 

[Trailblazer]

But she never uses circular reasoning

Sometimes I do.

Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.[1] The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

So here is my perfectly valid circular argument:

If the premise Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God is true, then the conclusion God exists must be true.

Once a person has proven the premise to themselves then they know God exists!

 

[Trailblazer]

I must have missed it. I did not see any there.

You did not see the claims? here, let me help:

Baha’u’llah’s Two Bold Claims

All of which leads us back to Baha’u’llah, who made two very bold claims. First, he declared he was God’s messenger for the next one thousand years, having the same divine authority, the same Holy Spirit, the same divine power, as Moses, Christ, Muhammad, and the other founders of the major world religions:

This station, by itself, makes the Baha’i Faith the youngest of the major world religions.

Baha’u’llah made a second and even more challenging claim. He declared he was the promised world messiah foretold in all the prophecies, in all the holy books, of all the religions of the world – the one promised to come on the Day of Judgment, the Day of God, the Time of the End, the End of the World, to establish the kingdom of God on Earth.

Baha’u’llah declared this period in history as the Day of God, the Time of the End. His mission is nothing less than the establishment of this glorious kingdom – the unification of the entire human race into an all-embracing, spiritually mature world civilization based upon divine principles of justice and love, and whose watchword will be unity in diversity.

With this second claim, Baha’is believe that all of the religions of the world have been consummated and fulfilled with the coming of Baha’u’llah.

https://bahaiteachings.org/what-did-bahaullah-teach?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It can be proven to oneself if one looks at the evidence that supports the claims of Baha'u'llah and connects the dots. I am not saying it is easy, but it can be done. God has never been much for making things easy.

It can't be done if it's unprovable, and you said that it's unprovable.

... so which is it?

 

[PureX]

Ironically, these kinds of flawed, absolutist assertions are just the kind of thing you are complaining about here.

Generalities are "absolute assertions" unless you choose to presume them to be. Why'd you do that, I wonder?

 

[Trailblazer]

And my question is, why shouldn't this God make himself known to people "He" supposedly cares about? This God you speak of should know exactly what would convince me of "His" existence, if "He" actually cared. So all I can conclude is that "He" doesn't care for me to know about his existence, or can't show me that "He" exists or "He" doesn't actually exist. I'm not sure why it's my problem if I can't tell that "He" exists.

As far as I know, God didn't give me anything.

God has made Himself known to everyone via the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. That is what God gave you and everyone else.

God does not care what would convince you since God is not trying to convince you. God only makes Himself known.

 

[Koldo]

I don't have time to do that but go ahead and do that. If you actually did that you might discover the difference.

You cannot compare a religious leader with someone who claimed to be a Messenger of God. There is a minimum criteria for a Messenger of God.

1. He had good character as exemplified by his qualities such as love, mercy, kindness, truth, justice, benevolence, gracious, merciful, righteous, forgiving, patient.

2. He believed he had been given a mission by God and did everything he could to see that it was carried out. He was completely successful before his death, and he accomplished everything that he set out to do.

3. He wrote much about God and God's purpose for humans both individually and collectively, or scriptures were written by others who spoke for him. He firmly believed that the work he was doing was for the Cause of God.

4. He had many followers while he was alive, and there are still millions who follow his teachings and gather in groups based on the religion he founded.

5. His followers have grown more numerous in recent times.

I think I should point out that probably no atheist on this world has such a low bar for what counts as a messenger of God. I would like to address each one individually, by the way:

1) I don't even find it necessary for a messenger to have those traits. As far as I am concerned, the messenger could be Hitler, and no less of a messenger.

2) A lot of people may think they have been given a mission from God, and accomplish what they think God wants from them, and yet be merely deluded.

3) That's a fair criterion in itself.

4 and 5) I don't see those as relevant. There are millions of people that believe in the flat Earth. Popularity really doesn't mean anything to me.

 

[Koldo]

Yes, God could do that without violating your free will.

Great. Then if/when the extraordinary evidence shows up, I will believe in the extraordinary claim that God exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

Where did I do this?

You did not do it but others did it. I apologize for putting it in my post to you.

Ah! The big "IF"

It is only an IF for people who don't know.

SO:
The B.Man said that God exists
∴ God exists.

Have I missed something, or is this your latest conclusion?

It is the conclusion I came to AFTER I looked at all the evidence and verified that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

This:

"He provided the evidence that support His claims."

Is a claim on your part. You would still need to provide at the very least his evidence, And you have not does so, or if you think that you have you only demonstrated that Mr. B did not have proper evidence.

By the way, that was a weak attempt at passing the buck.

That is not a claim. It is my personal opinion. I do not claim it because I cannot prove it to you.

I have provided His evidence on innumerable occasions but it was thrown back in my face with comments such as "that's not evidence!" So why should I post it again?

I have no buck to pass because I am not responsible for doing other people's homework.

 

[Trailblazer]

This appears to contradict your previous post of not saying anything about evidence.

And once again, what is the evidence that the supposed messengers supply?

All the Messengers of God provide the same kind of evidence, but the evidence for Baha'u'llah is more verifiable since there is written documentation whereas we do not have that for the previous Messengers that date back in history.

The following evidence (1-4) is objective evidence according to the definition because it can be examined and evaluated:

1. The character of Baha'u'llah
2. The life of Baha'u'llah
3. The mission of Baha'u'llah (the history)
4. The Writings of Baha'u'llah

What does objective evidence mean?

Objective evidence refers to information based on facts that can be proved by means of search like analysis, measurement, and observation. One can examine and evaluate objective evidence.

What does objective evidence mean?

 

[Trailblazer]

I have a feeling that you cannot demonstrate it at all. Break it down into pieces and see if they add up. if one can develop a pattern of observations you may be able to provide some evidence. Disparate claims are not evidence on their own. You would need something to tie them together.

That is possible to do but it is not my job to demonstrate anything. All I can do is point you to the source material but you have to do your own research.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is very easy to fool ourselves.

If that is true, it applies to everyone, including you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your assertion that "God IS the exception to every generally accepted rule" IS special pleading.

No, the fallacy does not apply to God because God IS the exception to every generally accepted rule.

Logical fallacies do not apply to God because God is not subject to logic.