Can we change our mind about what we believe?

[Sand Dancer]

Can we change our mind about what we believe?

@PureX said that one CAN change their mind, but they won't because they don't want to deny their current understanding of 'what is'. #523

I disagree. One CAN change their mind, and they sometimes do, if they get new information that causes them to change their mind. However, if they don't change their mind, it is because they truly believe that what they believe is true according to their current understanding. It is not that they won’t change their mind, as if they are stubbornly refusing to change their mind, it is that they have no reason to change their mind.

Why should anyone deny that what they believe is true?

Conversely, why should anyone accept any belief as true if they don’t believe it is true?

Why should atheists accept that God exists when they see no evidence for God’s existence?

I do not think that atheists are stubbornly refusing to believe in God. I take them at their word when they say that they see no evidence for God. It is not that they won’t believe in God, it is that they can’t believe in God because they see no evidence for God. The same holds true for me. It is not that I won’t disbelieve in God, it is that I can’t disbelieve in God because I see evidence for God.

I think so. When we learn new things, we incorporate those things into our current thought process.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, some have. As for me, I first believed in Baha'i in the summer of of 1970. I admit that I was too hasty at that time in coming to that conclusion. I read the introductory part to the Seven Valleys of Baha'u'llah, before the Valley of Search, and detected the Voice of God. However, I should have investigated more deeply than that.

I had a similar experience. I discovered the Baha'i Faith in the fall of 1970 and I joined shortly after that. I did read a lot of books before I joined but maybe I should have done more investigation.

I could have been mistaken that this was the Voice of God. I had read some other literature, but not that deeply into it. Interestingly I had read the Hidden words before that and thought they were nice sayings, but there was nothing special about the Hidden Words. After my “awakening” I thought the Hidden Words were special.

Any of us could be mistaken in believing that this was the Voice of God! I did not think in terms of that when I joined, I joined on the basis that I believed in Baha'u'llah. Now I cannot remember what the Baha'i card that I signed said. Admittedly, at that time I did not connect Baha'u'llah with God since that is not what attracted me to the Faith. I was not raised in any religion or believing in God, and I was not searching for God. I simply identified with the teachings and principles of the Faith.

However I made the mistake of not investigating the history of the Baha'i Faith and I had a Christian friend in college who had read Baha'i history literature that was written that I now know was off the mark. I don't know where he got what he read, but he told me flat out that Baha'u'llah was a killer. He thought the way to properly investigate the Baha'i Faith was to look only at sources outside of what Baha'is wrote. I know this because he said so at a fireside I had attended before this. I was just as naive when he said this as when I had decided the Baha'i faith was true. I believed what he said at first without reservation. But then I thought, what about the “spiritual” evidence that I felt?

I did not investigate the history of the Baha'i Faith before I became a Baha'i, and I don't think that is a requirement. Many decades later I discovered the Miller book written by a Christian about the history, as he tried to coyly pretend it was only presenting facts. It did not take long before I realized that book was full of inaccuracies, a Christian attempting to discredit the Baha'i Faith. Luckily, by then I knew more about the history of the Faith so I could compare.

From this initial beginning I decided to look at both sides, not just one side. Over the years I went out of my way sometimes to question what the Baha'i Faith said. I didn't for years though read much in the way of reading alternative accounts of the history of the Baha'i faith I admit. I did do more later reading hoping that would help in a discussion with a skeptic about the history of the Baha'i Faith. Some scholarly people have waxed skeptical about Baha'i history and I had paid attention to those.

I think it is good that you looked at both sides, because that is what you had to do for your own personal satisfaction. I never felt the need to look at that the history in great detail since my belief was not based upon Baha'i history.

Other than history I had more problems reconciling some things with scholars, or with history and science. There were times when I have been on the ropes in believing. I am strong at the moment, and I'm not expecting that to change. I have been through the mill over more than 50 years, and there is so much evidence in favor of the Baha'i Revelation in my estimation that things that are left that are a problem don't really bother me, and those do exist.

I was only on the ropes that one time when I was worried about The Tablet of the Maiden having sexual innuendos. You probably remember that!
It still kind of bothers me if I think about it since I have certain issues wit sexuality, but I came to understand it was not sexual so it was resolved in my mind.

I have been in forums for over 20 years, and have encountered attitudes and arguments against the Baha'i Revelation that at times have been a problem for my belief, but in the end I bless those encounters, because I learn from encounters. I don't enjoy hostile encounters though, and I can get hostile back at times, which is not a good thing. Sometimes I say nothing back because I'm afraid of my own tendency sometimes of not having a good attitude.

I have been in forums for about 14 years, and have encountered attitudes and arguments against the Baha'i Faith, but I always looked into the basis of those arguments and they turned out to be nothing of any substance, so they never affected my beliefs. Like you, in the end I bless those encounters, because I learned from those encounters. In fact, I have probably learned more about the Baha'i Faith by looking things up for others in order to post on forums than I have learned by reading just for my own edification!

As for atheists, whatever their reason for not believing in God, I don't condemn them for that, and there are atheists with good morals and attitudes, and there are people that believe in religion with bad morals and attitudes. People that are atheists are not condemned to eternal hell in the Baha'i Faith, or even experiencing hell initially depending on their morals.

I fully agree with you on all of that. I feel the same way about atheists.

I won't cite from the Writings why I think so. Hell or paradise is a condition that is not binary, with two opposite extremes in the Baha'i Faith. It is a graduated condition with a lot of gray between black and white.

I also do not believe that heaven and hell are binary, since that is black and white thinking and makes no logical sense. I believe that in the spiritual world we will find ourselves in a graduated condition somewhere along a continuum between black and white. Nobody will be in either heaven or hell because that is black and white thinking.

It is the same in this world, nothing is either black or white, and since we carry over who we were in this world to the next world, it only makes sense that we will enter the spiritual world somewhere along a continuum.

Also in the next world, no matter how much a person is in hell in the beginning, they can progress. A person is not fixed in the same condition forever, and there is only progress in the next world. God does whatever He wills and God can use mercy for some people more than others also in my opinion, and I don't see that as violating justice. Justice and mercy don't contradict each other in my mind. All people receive mercy from God in my view, some more than others.

Somewhere in the Writings it says we can progress from the state we were in when we died and entered the spiritual world, so that is the starting point for progress, after which we continue to develop along a new line. We will be whoever we were when we died and we can progress from that point on. I don't think we can make up for the loss of progress in this life, what we forfeited by our choices and actions, but as you said people can progress by the mercy of God, although it is God's choice on whom He will bestow that mercy.

 

[Trailblazer]

I think so. When we learn new things, we incorporate those things into our current thought process.

I sure hope we do!

 

[idea]

Can we change our mind about what we believe?

I've changed my beliefs. Painful thing.

Everyone who has been through a divorce has changed their beliefs about someone. I suppose it's similar to divorce - changing religious beliefs.

 

[Truthseeker]

I did not investigate the history of the Baha'i Faith before I became a Baha'i, and I don't think that is a requirement.

True, not a requirement, but in my case it almost led my losing faith in the Baha'i Faith.

I think it is good that you looked at both sides, because that is what you had to do for your own personal satisfaction. I never felt the need to look at that the history in great detail since my belief was not based upon Baha'i history.

That's also true of me, but learning later that the "history" presenting by my Christian friend was bogus helped my faith. By the way, for a long time I held a grudge against my Christian friend, but decades later realized he was misguided, and was trying to help me. I remember very clearly to this his name. His name was Paul Bryant, the same as a college football coach at the time.

I was only on the ropes that one time when I was worried about The Tablet of the Maiden having sexual innuendos. You probably remember that!
It still kind of bothers me if I think about it since I have certain issues wit sexuality, but I came to understand it was not sexual so it was resolved in my mind.

Yes, I remember.

I have been in forums for about 14 years, and have encountered attitudes and arguments against the Baha'i Faith, but I always looked into the basis of those arguments and they turned out to be nothing of any substance, so they never affected my beliefs. Like you, in the end I bless those encounters, because I learned from those encounters. In fact, I have probably learned more about the Baha'i Faith by looking things up for others in order to post on forums than I have learned by reading just for my own edification!

Wait a minute, you came to Planet Baha'i in January 2013. Unless you were at other forums before that it has been almost 11 years. I am good at subtraction.

I don't think we can make up for the loss of progress in this life, what we forfeited by our choices and actions, but as you said people can progress by the mercy of God, although it is God's choice on whom He will bestow that mercy.

Yes, very true.

40. O MY SERVANT!
Free thyself from the fetters of this world, and loose thy soul from the prison of self. Seize thy chance, for it will come to thee no more.
(Baha'u'llah, The Persian Hidden Words)

 

[Trailblazer]

Wait a minute, you came to Planet Baha'i in January 2013. Unless you were at other forums before that it has been almost 11 years. I am good at subtraction.

Thanks for catching that error. You are right, it has been almost 11 years. I was tired when I posted that so I was confusing when I started posting on forums with when I moved to this house. My math was still wrong since I moved here in January 2009, which was about 15 years ago, not 14.

 

[CG Didymus]

Believing that we know does not make it so. And the more adamantly we believe that it does, the more delusional we become.

Here we have Baha'is that "know" what they believe is The Truth. Which true believers in which religion doesn't also "know" that what their religion teaches is The Truth. Anybody in any religion can easily lose that "faith" or belief in that religion and believe something else. However, If they believe it, I'm sure it's doing good for them and seems true.

Like those fundy Christians that believe Jesus is the only way and rose from the dead and is God... that he alone can save a person from their sins and being cast into hell with Satan. Yet, Baha'is believe that none of that is true. And they both, Baha'is and fundy Christians, think the other is completely wrong.

 

[PureX]

Here we have Baha'is that "know" what they believe is The Truth. Which true believers in which religion doesn't also "know" that what their religion teaches is The Truth. Anybody in any religion can easily lose that "faith" or belief in that religion and believe something else. However, If they believe it, I'm sure it's doing good for them and seems true.

Like those fundy Christians that believe Jesus is the only way and rose from the dead and is God... that he alone can save a person from their sins and being cast into hell with Satan. Yet, Baha'is believe that none of that is true. And they both, Baha'is and fundy Christians, think the other is completely wrong.

It's not just the religious that become "true believers" and thereby delusional. There is a significant number of people that participate here on RF that are "true believers" in the myth that science is the only effective means of discerning the truth of existence, because the truth of existence is purely physical. And they believe this just as whole-heartedly as any religious zealot believes in the truth of their god. In fact, when these two groups of "true believers" meet, they become caught in an endless battle of belief as neither can accept the other's, and neither can relinquish their own. And in their minds, only one "true belief" can be true. There are threads here that run on into the hundreds of posts as these two opposing groups of "true believers" fight endlessly and pointlessly with each other about who's belief is the truly true belief.

When in fact none of them could possibly know.

But this is the dishonesty and delusion that comes with "belief".

 

[PureX]

Although humans share a great deal in terms of thought experience and motivation, every human is unique. To assume that we all believe in God or a particular religion for the same reasons is illogical since it is the fallacy of hasty generalization.

That isn't what I posted. What I posted was that not one of these "believers" can honesty or logically know that what they believe about God, is true (and this goes for the atheists as well). That's not a vague generalization. That's a fact of the human condition.

Since all humans are unique, my thought process and reason for believing what I believe is unlike any other human, even though my experiences and thought process is somewhat similar to that of other Baha'is, such as @Truthseeker. I responded to his post, and in that post I shared how I came to be a Baha'i and why I continue to believe in Baha'u'llah after over 50 years. #62

Nevertheeless, your thought process and experiences prove nothing to anyone but you. Just as is true for any other "believer".

Special knowledge has nothing to do with logic. Special knowledge about God comes through the Messengers of God. Of course that is a belief, since it can never be proven as a fact. Any special knowledge I have comes from Baha'u'llah, it has nothing to do with "me."

"Special knowledge" is not really knowledge at all. It's just a theory being accepted as the truth: i.e., "believe in"

I am not "claiming certainty", I am saying that I am certain.

C'mon, read that back to yourself a few times until you can actually SEE it.

There is a big difference between those two. When you tell me I am lying to myself you are speaking for me and that is not only rude, it is arrogant, since you cannot know I am not certain.

Your self-imposed certainty is irrelevant. We humans lie to ourselves all the time bout all kinds of things, and most of the time we never realize we're doing it. You're not the exception. It's why we need each other to point it out to us lest we become so delusionsal that we become a danger to ourselves and to others.

A person can be certain that a belief is true. That does not mean they are claiming it is true.

Again, please read this a few times until you can actually SEE what you're saying. You are literally defining willful self-delusion.

I never said that believing that I know makes it so.

Then why 'believe' it's so? Why not just be honest about it and simply hope that it's so because you want it to be?

My belief can never be proven to be true so I am not claiming it is so.
"I believe" it is so is not a claim, it is an inner sense of certitude.

It's a statement of deliberate self-delusion, and you can't seem to see that. All I'm trying to ask, is why? Why not just choose faith instead of this deliberate self-delusion that has you "believing in" things that you can't possibly know or prove to be true?

 

[Trailblazer]

It's not just the religious that become "true believers" and thereby delusional. There is a significant number of people that participate here on RF that are "true believers" in the myth that science is the only effective means of discerning the truth of existence, because the truth of existence is purely physical. And they believe this just as whole-heartedly as any religious zealot believes in the truth of their god. In fact, when these two groups of "true believers" meet, they become caught in an endless battle of belief as neither can accept the other's, and neither can relinquish their own. And in their minds, only one "true belief" can be true.

A person who truly believes in something, whatever it is, is not by definition delusional.

delusional: characterized by or holding false beliefs or judgments about external reality that are held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, typically as a symptom of a mental condition.

delusional means - Google Search

www.google.com

Neither believers in science or believers in a religion hold false beliefs or judgments about external reality that are held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, so neither one is delusional. A delusion is a symptom of a mental condition.

Delusional is only a label you attach to people, and it is only your personal opinion, yet you state it as an assertion, but it is a bald assertion since you have no evidence to back it up. All you have is a personal opinion.

What is "bald assertion?" Well the name says it all, doesn't it? It's stating something without backing it up.
Logical Fallacy Lesson 4: Bald Assertion | Rational Response Squad

It is not true that "in their minds, only one "true belief" can be true." Baha'is believe in both science and religion and that each one is just as important as the other one.

“Religion,” according to the Bahá’í writings, “is the outer expression of the divine reality. Therefore, it must be living, vitalized, moving and progressive.”1 “Science is the first emanation from God toward man. All created things embody the potentiality of material perfection, but the power of intellectual investigation and scientific acquisition is a higher virtue specialized to man alone. Other beings and organisms are deprived of this potentiality and attainment.”2
Science and Religion | An Ever-Advancing Civilization | God and His Creation | What Bahá’ís Believe

 

[Trailblazer]

That isn't what I posted. What I posted was that not one of these "believers" can honesty or logically know that what they believe about God, is true (and this goes for the atheists as well). That's not a vague generalization. That's a fact of the human condition.

No, nobody can know in the sense of being able to prove what they believe is true as a fact, but they can know in another sense.

Nevertheeless, your thought process and experiences prove nothing to anyone but you. Just as is true for any other "believer".

That's true, but I have no need to prove anything to anyone. I am only responsible for my own beliefs, as we all are.

"Special knowledge" is not really knowledge at all. It's just a theory being accepted as the truth: i.e., "believe in"

If that 'special knowledge' comes from God it is knowledge from God. That is a belief that is accepted as the truth.

C'mon, read that back to yourself a few times until you can actually SEE it.

I said: I am not "claiming certainty", I am saying that I am certain.

My saying 'I am certain' is not a claim, it is a belief. A belief is not a claim.

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

I make no claims. I only state what I believe. Baha'u'llah made the claims and I believe His claims.

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

An acceptance that my belief is true is not a claim that it is true.
I believe that my belief is true. I never claimed that my belief is true.

As nouns the difference between claim and belief is that claim is a demand of ownership made for something (eg claim ownership, claim victory) while belief is mental acceptance of a claim as truth regardless of supporting or contrary empirical evidence.
What is the difference between claim and belief? | WikiDiff

Baha'u'llah made a claim to be a Messenger of God so he claimed ownership of the title Messenger of God.
I am making no claims because I have nothing to claim.

Your self-imposed certainty is irrelevant. We humans lie to ourselves all the time bout all kinds of things, and most of the time we never realize we're doing it. You're not the exception.

If humans believe things that are not true, that doesn't mean they are lying to themselves. Lying implies deliberate conscious intent. Most of the time when people maintain false or unvalidated beliefs they are not consciously aware of it, since it is coming from their unconscious minds..

What does it mean when you lie to yourself?

We use self-deception, or self-denial, when we allow ourselves to maintain false or unvalidated beliefs. Psychologically, lying to ourselves is an act of self-defense or -enhancement. Feb 23, 2022

Is Your Partner Being Sketchy? Here Are 10 Signs of Deception in a Relationship

In this article, we explore what deception could look like in relationships, why people do it, how it can erode trust, and how to rebuild the relationship.

www.verywellmind.com

​

It's why we need each other to point it out to us lest we become so delusionsal that we become a danger to ourselves and to others.

Let's say someone had a false belief about something, anything. Unless others have a way to know the belief is false it is only their personal opinion that it is false. Religious beliefs are unfalsifiable so you do not know they are false. As such, you cannot correct anyone who holds them.

Again, please read this a few times until you can actually SEE what you're saying. You are literally defining willful self-delusion.

Apparently you do not know the difference between a belief and a claim. See my response above.
I have a religious belief, that is all I have, and it is not willful self-delusion, not by any definition.
Unless you can prove that my belief is not in accordance with reality, it is not a self-delusion.

self-delusion: the action of deluding oneself; failure to recognize reality.

self-delusion means - Google Search

www.google.com

Then why 'believe' it's so? Why not just be honest about it and simply hope that it's so because you want it to be?

Because that is not the truth, and I am not a liar. I believe it is so that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God and thus God exists, I do not hope it is so because I want it to be so. I believe it is so because of the evidence.

However, there are some things that I only hope are so, such as the promises of a glorious afterlife, because there is no evidence.

It's a statement of deliberate self-delusion, and you can't seem to see that.

Belief is an inner certitude that something is true, it is not self-delusion, and you can't seem to see that. The reason you cannot see that is because you have convinced yourself that all belief is self-delusion and your bias prevents you from seeing that is not the case.

All I'm trying to ask, is why? Why not just choose faith instead of this deliberate self-delusion that has you "believing in" things that you can't possibly know or prove to be true?

What I believe cannot be proven true but that does not mean I cannot know it is true. I do not need proof because I have enough evidence.
I also have faith that it is true, and there is no contradiction, since I have faith that what I believe is true. I have to have faith since I cannot prove it is true.

 

[CG Didymus]

"Special knowledge" is not really knowledge at all. It's just a theory being accepted as the truth: i.e., "believe in"

This "messenger" of God stuff is presented as being The Truth. And I think a person who comes to believe in any of these supposed "messengers" accepts it as being The Truth. So, to the believer, it is "fact". I think this one Baha'i just uses "it is just a belief, because I can't prove it" to wiggle out of having to support the claims of her religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

This "messenger" of God stuff is presented as being The Truth. And I think a person who comes to believe in any of these supposed "messengers" accepts it as being The Truth. So, to the believer, it is "fact". I think this one Baha'i just uses "it is just a belief, because I can't prove it" to wiggle out of having to support the claims of her religion.

Messengers sent by God can be The Truth, but Messengers sent by God cannot be considered a fact since it can never be proven they were sent by God.

I am not claiming anything so I do not have to support any claims.

As nouns the difference between claim and belief is that claim is a demand of ownership made for something (eg claim ownership, claim victory) while belief is mental acceptance of a claim as truth regardless of supporting or contrary empirical evidence.
What is the difference between claim and belief? | WikiDiff

Baha'u'llah made a claim to be a Messenger of God so he claimed the title Messenger of God. Baha'u'llah supported His claims with evidence.
I am making no claims because I have nothing to claim.

The psychology behind this game you are playing is that you want to turn my beliefs into claims so you can say that I have to prove my claims are true, but it won't work since I am not claiming that my beliefs are true. I am only saying "I believe" they are true.

 

[joelr]

That's true, religious people have to accept the claims of the Messengers of God to be true, but they should not accept them as true without a thorough investigation of the Messenger, His character, His Life, and what He revealed in scripture.

How would those matter? A person who lives a good life and so on, qualifies for magic God messages, never before demonstrated, just from those qualities? That doesn't sound right.

Revealed scripture could be good evidence. But he didn't reveal anything a regular person could not say. The science, as we have gone over, was completely wrong, no philosophy, vague prophecy, same as all religions and cults and future predictors like Nostradamus.

But more important is an actual God could have said so many simple things to demonstrate this was out of the ordinary. The trillionth digit of pi.
Everything is made of atoms. The particles act like waves and particles depending on how you measure them.
The universe is expanding. The Milky Way galaxy is just one of billions. Time slows down with velocity. Light has a speed limit and goes around the earth 7 times in one second. Galaxies are being attracted gravitationally by invisible matter. Whatever.

Even what he says, is there anything new at all?

So you are giving him a huge pass on scripture and judging him on his life and character which is not something that demonstrated one is in communication from a God.

Not everyone will ever view the evidence the same way since humans all have different minds so they all process the evidence differently. As such it is absurd to think that there is some kind of evidence for God that everyone would recognize. Even if God showed up on earth, if that was possible, not everyone would recognize God as God.

The examples do not back up your claim. Do people all believe in germs? In other galaxies, in the conservation of energy, the periodic table, special relativity, time dillation?
People understand evidence and accept things hat are demonstrated to be true.
It's just with fiction and things without evidence that has thousands of interpretations.
So why would a God showing up not be the same? A God could speak to everyone in their mind, he could show up to each person and show he knowns their thoughts. He could immediately put all the information in every persons consciousness without even showing up.
By religious views he does want to, he does do evidence, but then it turns out it looks extremely like stories and folk tales people made up and educated writers put together official stories over time.
So a God wants that? Is it a joke? With Bahai, there are no miracles and things of this sort, but he could not make that claim because newspapers, communication, books, networks, were more of a thing. The text itself sounds like a person who was well read in Islam and a few other religions, making a claim. The creator of reality is happy with that? The likely explanation of him writing a "Conversations With God". type book and making a claim is more likely.

By not providing absolute proof, God set it up so we would have to have faith in order to believe.

And there are 2 billion Christinas, 2 billion Muslims and 1 billion Hindu who are not impressed by modern words of God? A God would not be sadistic enough to want a "faith only" movement, which automatically shuts out critical thinkers and skeptics. God would know we were well into the scientific age, not the Iron Age, and were needing good evidence.
He would also know faith is not a reliable way to know truth, I can have faith in any position, besides the other opposing religions, I can have faith in any movement I want just by having faith it's true.

He would have seen just the divide between Islam and Christianity on faith was separating the world and now he's going to add to that? In the age of scientific revolution and enlightenment? This argument does not sound likely at all.
God set up Christianity to be a faith religion AND said there would be false prophets in the future. Then shows up, doesn't give evidence and expects billions of Christians to ignore scripture about future prophets and only go by faith?

There is no way to prove that the claims of a Messenger of God are true. Try to think about why.
All we can do is look at the evidence that the Messenger provided to back His claims.

He provided no evidence to back his claim. He denied evolution, denied we are animals, thought the ether was real (at the time it was a theory), messed up cell biology and more but more importantly he didn't give one single bit of new information about reality. His philosophy is watered down with word salad and doesn't make philosophy. I don't know why this would be considered evidence for someone being a prophet of a God.

I would accept any religion that had the same evidence as my religion. I do accept other religions, but not as fully as I accept the Baha'i Faith, since none of the other religions have any scriptures that were penned in the hand of the Prophets or Messengers.

Islam makes that claim. Muhammad's words were written down as he memorized the text while Gabrielle spoke it too him.

But why is penning words evidence? He writes like a man who is praising God over and over and giving general wisdom.

There is evidence but there is no proof. The proof only comes after we die and experience the spirit realm.

If praise literature is evidence then there is all types of religions and evidence. Conversations With God would be evidence. Abraham, Bashar, all these channelers are evidence of more advanced races of spirits.

I have no doubt that the spirit realm exists but I would sure like to know more about it! That knowledge is with God alone.

Having no doubt doesn't make something true. I don't think you have evidence either. For a spirit, a spirit realm or a God. I'm always interested in evidence for these things.

 

[Trailblazer]

How would those matter? A person who lives a good life and so on, qualifies for magic God messages, never before demonstrated, just from those qualities? That doesn't sound right.

When I said His Life, I meant everything about His Life, from early childhood on, but regarding Baha'u'llah, particularly what He did during the last 40 years of His Life, which was related to His Mission from God.

Revealed scripture could be good evidence. But he didn't reveal anything a regular person could not say.

Baha'u'llah revealed information about God that a regular person could not, since there would be no way for a regular person to get that information.

The science, as we have gone over, was completely wrong, no philosophy, vague prophecy, same as all religions and cults and future predictors like Nostradamus.

I have no idea what science you are referring to that was wrong. The prophecies were not vague.

But more important is an actual God could have said so many simple things to demonstrate this was out of the ordinary. The trillionth digit of pi.
Everything is made of atoms. The particles act like waves and particles depending on how you measure them.
The universe is expanding. The Milky Way galaxy is just one of billions. Time slows down with velocity. Light has a speed limit and goes around the earth 7 times in one second. Galaxies are being attracted gravitationally by invisible matter. Whatever.

An important point is that God is not trying to prove that He exists so the Messenger of God is not trying to do things that are out of the ordinary to prove that he was a Messenger of God.

The spiritual station of the Messenger (Manifestation) of God is not revealed to the eyes of men, and the reason it is not revealed is explained below:

"... While the Manifestations of God all shine with the splendours of God's Revelation, they can reveal themselves in only two ways. The first is to appear in their naked glory. Should this happen, all human beings would witness their awesome power, would bow before their majesty and would submit their will entirely to God's Viceregent on earth. People would thus become puppets of God and lose their free will; all would follow the path of truth, not by their own volition but by capitulating to the irresistible power of the Manifestation of God………​

​

The only other way that the Manifestations of God can reveal themselves, which ensures the preservation of human free will, is to conceal their divine power behind the veil of human characteristics. Although they possess majestic, divine qualities, it is, according to Bahá’u’lláh, against the law of God for them to reveal these to the generality of mankind. Through this method people can exercise their free will to accept or to reject the Message of God, to live in accordance with His teachings or to disobey Him."​

Adib Taherzadeh, The Child of the Covenant, p. 17​

As noted in the passage below, the Divine Purpose is that “the pure in spirit and the detached in heart to ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean.” What that means in plain English is that God wants us to use our own innate intelligence to determine who the Manifestations of God are.

“He Who is the Day Spring of Truth is, no doubt, fully capable of rescuing from such remoteness wayward souls and of causing them to draw nigh unto His court and attain His Presence. “If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people.” His purpose, however, is to enable the pure in spirit and the detached in heart to ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean, that thereby they who seek the Beauty of the All-Glorious may be distinguished and separated from the wayward and perverse. Thus hath it been ordained by the all-glorious and resplendent Pen….” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 71​

God does not reveal information about scientific matters since that is not the purpose of a revelation from God. Messengers of God teach that we must do good, that we must be generous, sincere, truthful, law-abiding, and faithful. God leaves it up to humans to discover the mysteries of the material world.

Even what he says, is there anything new at all?

Yes, there are some new teachings and laws.

So you are giving him a huge pass on scripture and judging him on his life and character which is not something that demonstrated one is in communication from a God.

Nothing is going to 'demonstrate' that a man received communication from God. Such a claim cannot be proven, but even if it could be proven by something supernatural, miracles, etc., this would never be proof to everyone.

So why would a God showing up not be the same? A God could speak to everyone in their mind, he could show up to each person and show he knowns their thoughts. He could immediately put all the information in every persons consciousness without even showing up.

What atheists do not understand is that just because an All-Powerful God 'could' do something that does not mean God 'would' do it. God only does what God chooses to do, period, and since God is All-Knowing and All-Wise, God knows what is best to do, better what to do than any human could know.

Why would God put all the information in every persons consciousness? Why should God do that? You want everything handed to you on a silver platter, but God doesn't operate that way. God makes it somewhat difficult, but not impossible, to recognize His Messengers.

(Continued on next post)

 

[Trailblazer]

By religious views he does want to, he does do evidence, but then it turns out it looks extremely like stories and folk tales people made up and educated writers put together official stories over time.
So a God wants that? Is it a joke? With Bahai, there are no miracles and things of this sort, but he could not make that claim because newspapers, communication, books, networks, were more of a thing.

There were miracles in the Baha'i Faith: Famous Miracles in the Baha’i Faith

The text itself sounds like a person who was well read in Islam and a few other religions, making a claim. The creator of reality is happy with that? The likely explanation of him writing a "Conversations With God". type book and making a claim is more likely.

Baha'u'llah was well read in Islam since He was raised as a Muslim, but that is not where He got His knowledge. He got His knowledge from God.

The creator of reality KNOWS MORE than you do. That means that whatever you see is what you get, and that is what God wanted to do, something that atheists do not seem to understand. Logically, what we see is what God chose to do, if God exists, so the other option you can choose is that God does not exist.

And there are 2 billion Christinas, 2 billion Muslims and 1 billion Hindu who are not impressed by modern words of God? A God would not be sadistic enough to want a "faith only" movement, which automatically shuts out critical thinkers and skeptics. God would know we were well into the scientific age, not the Iron Age, and were needing good evidence.

Sorry, but God has always required that we have faith in order to believe, but God has also provided evidence so that faith is not blind.

The problem with critical thinkers and skeptics is that they think they know everything so they are not open-minded to what God has provided. They argue endlessly against it, so that prevents them from ever finding the truth.

He would also know faith is not a reliable way to know truth, I can have faith in any position, besides the other opposing religions, I can have faith in any movement I want just by having faith it's true.

God does know that faith alone is not enough, and that is why God also provides evidence.

The Messenger of God is the evidence that God exists, but not everyone is going to recognize the Messenger of God, especially a new one.

Matthew 7:13-14 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.​

There are reasons why few people find it.

If you use logic and reason you would realize that few people find the narrow gate and even fewer people enter through it because it is narrow, so it is difficult to get through... It is difficult to get through because one has to be willing to give up all their preconceived ideas, have an open mind, and think for themselves. Most people do not embark upon such a journey. They go through the wide gate, the easy one to get through – their own religious tradition or their own preconceived ideas about God or no god. They follow that broad road that is easiest for them to travel.... and that is why the NEW religion is always rejected by most people for a very long time after it has been revealed.

He would have seen just the divide between Islam and Christianity on faith was separating the world and now he's going to add to that? In the age of scientific revolution and enlightenment? This argument does not sound likely at all.

Of course God sees the divide between Islam and Christianity which is separating the world, and that is one reason God sent Baha'u'llah,to teach the unity of mankind and that all religions are one, from one Source.

God set up Christianity to be a faith religion AND said there would be false prophets in the future. Then shows up, doesn't give evidence and expects billions of Christians to ignore scripture about future prophets and only go by faith?

If Christians understood the meaning of their scripture they would know that Baha'u'llah was the return of Christ and they would become Baha'is. Most Baha'is in the western world were formerly Christians. However, most Christians won't become Baha'is because they were indoctrinated into Christianity, so they believe that (a) Christianity is the only true religion and (b) the same man Jesus is going to return.

He provided no evidence to back his claim. He denied evolution, denied we are animals, thought the ether was real (at the time it was a theory), messed up cell biology and more but more importantly he didn't give one single bit of new information about reality. His philosophy is watered down with word salad and doesn't make philosophy. I don't know why this would be considered evidence for someone being a prophet of a God.

I guess you do not know what the Baha'i teachings are. The Baha'i Faith does not deny that we are animals, but it teaches that we also have a spiritual nature. The Baha'i Faith does not deny evolution, we believe in it.

Baha'u'llah did reveal new teachings and principles. You can deny that if you want to but that is like denying that the earth is round.

https://bahaiteachings.org/brand-new-religious-principles-bahai-faith

Islam makes that claim. Muhammad's words were written down as he memorized the text while Gabrielle spoke it too him.

But why is penning words evidence? He writes like a man who is praising God over and over and giving general wisdom.

From what I know, it was the scribes who memorized the text as Gabrielle spoke it to Muhammad. Muhammad did not write the Qur'an. Scribes wrote it years later. The Bab and Baha'u'llah were the only Messengers of God who wrote their own scriptures.

I do not say that penning words is evidence. It is what those words say that constitutes evidence, although it is only part of the evidence.

If praise literature is evidence then there is all types of religions and evidence. Conversations With God would be evidence. Abraham, Bashar, all these channelers are evidence of more advanced races of spirits.

That's evidence, if we believe what these chanelers say.

Having no doubt doesn't make something true. I don't think you have evidence either. For a spirit, a spirit realm or a God. I'm always interested in evidence for these things.

Of course me having no doubt does not make anything true. There is evidence of a spiritual realm, from mediums who have contacted spirits in that realm. I won't say that NDEs are evidence of a spiritual realm because those people were not fully dead so they never crossed over to the spiritual realm of existence.

 

[Truthseeker]

"... While the Manifestations of God all shine with the splendours of God's Revelation, they can reveal themselves in only two ways. The first is to appear in their naked glory. Should this happen, all human beings would witness their awesome power, would bow before their majesty and would submit their will entirely to God's Viceregent on earth. People would thus become puppets of God and lose their free will; all would follow the path of truth, not by their own volition but by capitulating to the irresistible power of the Manifestation of God………The only other way that the Manifestations of God can reveal themselves, which ensures the preservation of human free will, is to conceal their divine power behind the veil of human characteristics. Although they possess majestic, divine qualities, it is, according to Bahá’u’lláh, against the law of God for them to reveal these to the generality of mankind. Through this method people can exercise their free will to accept or to reject the Message of God, to live in accordance with His teachings or to disobey Him."Adib Taherzadeh, The Child of the Covenant, p. 17

Adib Taherzadeh was very smart as well as well informed. No wonder he was elected to the UHJ.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Can we change our mind about what we believe?

@PureX said that one CAN change their mind, but they won't because they don't want to deny their current understanding of 'what is'. #523

I disagree. One CAN change their mind, and they sometimes do, if they get new information that causes them to change their mind. However, if they don't change their mind, it is because they truly believe that what they believe is true according to their current understanding. It is not that they won’t change their mind, as if they are stubbornly refusing to change their mind, it is that they have no reason to change their mind.

Why should anyone deny that what they believe is true?

Conversely, why should anyone accept any belief as true if they don’t believe it is true?

Why should atheists accept that God exists when they see no evidence for God’s existence?

I do not think that atheists are stubbornly refusing to believe in God. I take them at their word when they say that they see no evidence for God. It is not that they won’t believe in God, it is that they can’t believe in God because they see no evidence for God. The same holds true for me. It is not that I won’t disbelieve in God, it is that I can’t disbelieve in God because I see evidence for God.

I think that most are not interested sincerely in truth. It’s all about ‘What do I get out of it and what’s in it for me? The god of this age is materialism and consumerism.

 

[PureX]

I think that most are not interested sincerely in truth. It’s all about ‘What do I get out of it and what’s in it for me? The god of this age is materialism and consumerism.

I agree that we humans are not much interested in the 'truth of it all', but it's not just because we're selfish. It's because we don't have the intellectual capacity necessary to discern the whole truth. It would require omniscience, and we simply are nowhere near that kind of capability. So instead we settle for whatever theory of the truth that we invent for ourselves that appears to "work" (function) in relation to our limited knowledge and experience of the world at present. And that leads us into the realm of self-interest. And into a kind of obsession with the illusion of being in control. And it is this desire for control, or even just the illusion of it, that we are really always in pursuit of (rather than the truth).

But very few of us will openly admit to this. As for whatever reason we don't want to see ourselves as being this intellectually limited, and this selfishly motivated.

 

[Muffled]

I believe I have done so when my pastor came up with a good argument that changed my thinking.