Claims vs. Beliefs

[ElishaElijah]

Ooh! You edited your post and proved yourself to be wrong. Congratulations.

Actually was trying to help you out, thought maybe you didn’t have a concordance.

 

[ElishaElijah]

@Subduction Zone Have a good evening, love ya man

 

[Sheldon]

You”ll have to get yourself a concordance and check for yourself then

"A major evolutionary innovation has unfurled right in front of researchers’ eyes. It’s the first time evolution has been caught in the act of making such a rare and complex new trait.

And because the species in question is a bacterium, scientists have been able to replay history to show how this evolutionary novelty grew from the accumulation of unpredictable, chance events."

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually was trying to help you out, thought maybe you didn’t have a concordance.

I could have easily have gotten one. But as I said, your version does not work since we regularly see macroevolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@Subduction Zone Have a good evening, love ya man

Have a good night. Think about how you are claiming that God is a liar. Endless scientific evidence for evolution. None for creationism.. God would have had to have planted false evidence, a form of lying if what you believe is true.

 

[Nimos]

She wrote that she believes God exists, she believes her religion's leader Baha’u’llah was sent by God, she believes God communicated to Baha’u’llah.

If God doesn't sent Baha’u’llah to convert everyone to join religion Baha'i and pay the membership fees to religion Baha'i, if God doesn't sent Baha’u’llah to urge everyone to obey whatever he says whatever a book says whatever God says whatever everyone must obey, then can you or @Trailblazer tell me God sent Baha’u’llah to do what?

And later she also wrote that "we are each accountable to God for our own beliefs on Judgment Day". I think people who believe in her religion's version of God probably will join her religion and pay the membership fees and obey whatever her religion says whatever a book says whatever God says whatever they must obey; people who don't believe in her religion's God vice versa.

If she didn't mean that we'll receive judgement (likely bad consequences) on Judgment Day if we don't give our money to her religion and if we don't obey whatever her religion says whatever a book says whatever God says whatever we must obey, then can you or @Trailblazer tell me what does she means by saying "we are each accountable to God for our own beliefs on Judgment Day"?

Please look at what she wrote below, the enlarge and underlined part.

Well clearly as Bahai one would have to believe that Baha'u'llah were who he said, otherwise it wouldn't make a lot of sense to follow that religion. As far as I know there is no membership fee, the only one which could be considered that, is the one called "Ḥuqúqu'lláh" which is voluntary from what I understand. Otherwise it is through donations. But this is comparable with what you see in other religions as well.

JWs have to pay, Shia have to pay, Christians have to pay. These religions live off these things as they don't exactly produce anything worth anything or you could say that this is the "service" price followers have to pay. Its doesn't seem a lot different than a health organization, Greenpeace or even atheists experience which also survive through donations. Obviously I would think it would be better to give the money to health organizations and Greenpeace, but then again im not religious

That religious people believe that we will be judged one way or another, is not unique for the Bahais, I think all religions are built on this concept one way or another. These are ideas formed in ancient times and obviously still considered valid by a lot of people today, and God(s) being the best explanation and where you will be punished or somehow unfavored if you don't behave in certain ways according to the belief.

Baha'u'llah according to what they believe, were send to spread the message of God, either you believe this or you don't. And if you don't you either follow another religion and believe whatever they tell you, or you become an atheist.

 

[F1fan]

Yeah, but how come we can believe differently about the metaphysical status of the world. That is no different than all the different beliefs about gods.

Because there are historically many options, and many cultural traditions have used this variety of options to form their own belief systems.

Or the fact there are at least 6 theories of true and false in regards to knowledge.

And which ones do religious views use? None.

You are a standard non-religious member of the group found on the Internet. You hold certain cultural traditions that you don't doubt.

The internet, and the real world. Go figure.

I was like you, but then I learned to doubt our side as non-religious and became a general skeptic.

Doubt to such an extreme that you become mired. How do you ever decide what to have for dinner?

 

[F1fan]

It’s logical, if you’re claiming all of creation, the world, universe and everything in it just happened by abiogenesis and then evolution to what we have today then you cannot manipulate or have human intervention to accurately experiment or test your theory.

There are no Gods known to exist, so you can't attribute any real things existing from an assumption for which no evidence can justify. So objective thinkers throw out these religious ideas for being irrelevant.

 

[F1fan]

The Hebrew transliteration is (miyn) translated “kind” in English which means species. So I use the biblical translation “kind”.

The word "kind" from the King James Bible is only relevant to those who think the Noah's Ark myth is real. Are you one of these people?

If so, you're in trouble because kind cannot equate to species and work with how many kinds could have been on the Ark to the number of species that exist today. There's not enough time for the diversity. Plus, the Hindus were totally unaffected by the global flood, so, there's that too.

 

[Trailblazer]

She wrote that she believes God exists, she believes her religion's leader Baha’u’llah was sent by God, she believes God communicated to Baha’u’llah.

Yes, that is what I believe, except I don't believe that Baha'u'llah was a religious leader. I believe He was a Messenger of God who had a twofold nature, so He was both divine and human.

If God doesn't sent Baha’u’llah to convert everyone to join religion Baha'i and pay the membership fees to religion Baha'i, if God doesn't sent Baha’u’llah to urge everyone to obey whatever he says whatever a book says whatever God says whatever everyone must obey, then can you or @Trailblazer tell me God sent Baha’u’llah to do what?

That is incorrect. God did not send Baha'u'llah to convert everyone to join the Baha'i Faith and pay the membership fees. The Baha'i Faith has no membership fees, only voluntary contributions.

Baha'u'llah had no desire to convert anyone. Baha'u'llah enjoined everyone to investigate His claim and determine if it is true for themself.

Yes, there is a Book of Laws that Baha'u'llah wrote and Baha'is are enjoined to obey those Laws, but only Baha'is are responsible for obeying Baha'i laws, not anyone else.

God sent Baha'u'llah to reveal a message for all of humanity, a message that applies to this age in history.

What is the message of the Baháʼí Faith?

A primary theme of Baha'u'llah's teachings is achieving world peace through the establishment of unity, justice and equality. Therefore, Baha'u'llah's teachings specifically advocate for racial unity, gender equality, universal education, and harmony of science and religion.Nov 30, 2017

Who are the Baha'is and why are they so persecuted? - The ..

Baha'u'llah also revealed new social teachings and Laws and renewed the spiritual teachings that are the same in all the great religions.

And later she also wrote that "we are each accountable to God for our own beliefs on Judgment Day". I think people who believe in her religion's version of God probably will join her religion and pay the membership fees and obey whatever her religion says whatever a book says whatever God says whatever they must obey; people who don't believe in her religion's God vice versa.

If she didn't mean that we'll receive judgement (likely bad consequences) on Judgment Day if we don't give our money to her religion and if we don't obey whatever her religion says whatever a book says whatever God says whatever we must obey, then can you or @Trailblazer tell me what does she means by saying "we are each accountable to God for our own beliefs on Judgment Day"?

According to Baha'i beliefs, every time God sends a new Messenger (who we refer to as a Manifestation of God) is Judgment Day. Any bad consequences we will experience are because we rejected the Manifestation of God instead of recognizing Him.

“In the Bahá’í interpretation, the coming of each Manifestation of God is a Day of Judgment, but the coming of the supreme Manifestation of Bahá’u’lláh is the great Day of Judgment for the world cycle in which we are living. The trumpet blast of which Christ and Muhammad and many other prophets speak is the call of the Manifestation, which is sounded for all who are in heaven and on earth—the embodied and the disembodied. The meeting with God, through His Manifestation, is, for those who desire to meet Him, the gateway to the Paradise of knowing and loving Him, and living in love with all His creatures. Those, on the other hand, who prefer their own way to God’s way, as revealed by the Manifestation, thereby consign themselves to the hell of selfishness, error and enmity.”
Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 220

 

[Trailblazer]

Okay, after doing some research, i found out that some source says that menber's donation to your religion is voluntary. Members can voluntarily donate to (1) The Bahá’í Funds, or (2) Ḥuqúqu'lláh.

One of the link i provide although say it's voluntary, but it also says that it is a spiritual obligation (kind of a duty) for members to pay Ḥuqúqu'lláh to the religion, not sure is it true.

Added together with what you says in op "we are each accountable to God for our own beliefs on Judgment Day" as kind of an implicit threat statement.

Contribution to the Baha'i Fund is strictly voluntary and payment to the Ḥuqúqu'lláh is a private matter and it is only accepted by God is it is done with utmost joy and gladness, not only as an obligation to obey the Law..

1034. Solicitation of the Huqúqu'lláh is not Permitted
"…To demand the Huqúq is in no wise permissible. This command was revealed in the Book of God for various necessary matters ordained by God to be dependent upon material means. Therefore, if someone, with utmost pleasure and gladness, nay with insistence, wisheth to partake of this blessing, thou mayest accept. Otherwise, acceptance is not permissible."
(Bahá’u’lláh: Ibid., Extract No. 9)
Lights of Guidance/The Institution of Huqúqu'lláh - Bahaiworks, a library of works about the Bahá’í Faith

And now you say that there are no membership fees in your religion.

So, it's actually quite confusing whether or not there's membership fees in your religion.

Link:
The Bahá’í Funds
Ḥuqúqu'lláh

As I said above, all contributions to Baha'i Funds and the Ḥuqúqu'lláh is voluntary.

If there is nothing awaits anyone on judgement day if they didn't join your religion, then what do you mean when you say in your op that "we are each accountable to God for our own beliefs on Judgment Day"? What is the purpose and meaning of your implicit threat statement?

That was not a threat statement. It only means I believe we are all accountable to God, not only after we die but also while we are living on earth. What we are accountable for is recognizing the Messenger of God sent by God and obeying His Laws.

Only God knows what awaits anyone after they die.

You have burden of proof, if you want non-members to take your op's statements (regarding the existence of God and your religion's leader was sent by God) seriously as in believe your statements are facts.

If you don't want non-members to believe your statements are facts. Sure, then you don't have the burden of proof.

I never claimed that my religious beliefs are facts. They are not facts since they cannot be proven true. Since they cannot be proven true and since I am not trying to convince anyone they are true I do not have the burden of proof.

fact
something that is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information:
fact

 

[KWED]

Jesus Christ showed up, history supports his birth, life, teaching, miracles, resurrection.

I see that you are badly misinformed.
The magical aspects of Jesus' life are not accepted as historical fact. As far as historians are concerned, only a person now referred to as Jesus living in early 1st century Palestine, and being crucified by the Romans are genially accepted as probably true. The rest is just speculation and myth.
Sorry to disappoint.

 

[KWED]

It depends. On some scenarios, evidence is required to make the claim otherwise one could get into lawsuit and lose money or go to jail.

Not so. The claim can be (and often is) made without any supporting evidence. If the claim results in legal proceedings, then supporting evidence needs to be supplied. That's why people win/lose libel and slander cases.

 

[Sheldon]

I could have easily have gotten one. But as I said, your version does not work since we regularly see macroevolution.

Indeed, the fossil record demonstrates the fact of macroevolution on it's own.

 

[ElishaElijah]

The word "kind" from the King James Bible is only relevant to those who think the Noah's Ark myth is real. Are you one of these people?

If so, you're in trouble because kind cannot equate to species and work with how many kinds could have been on the Ark to the number of species that exist today. There's not enough time for the diversity. Plus, the Hindus were totally unaffected by the global flood, so, there's that too.

Of course I believe the story of Noah’s Ark and it’s not a myth like you assume. It’s seems that people may be using faulty information and calculations when they make the “myth” statements thinking there wasn’t enough room in the Ark for all the animals God brought to the Ark to save and repopulate the earth after the Flood.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Indeed, the fossil record demonstrates the fact of macroevolution on it's own.

No it doesn’t demonstrate that macro evolution is a fact, unless you’re talking about changing these elbow noodles and cheese into Mac-n-cheese for dinner.

 

[ppp]

Of course I believe the story of Noah’s Ark and it’s not a myth like you assume. It’s seems that people may be using faulty information and calculations when they make the “myth” statements thinking there wasn’t enough room in the Ark for all the animals God brought to the Ark to save and repopulate the earth after the Flood.

Like not enough room is the only problem with the Ark myth.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Like not enough room is the only problem with the Ark myth.

There was enough room, have you considered the information that you’re plugging into your equation might be faulty? You’re assuming you have the correct information.

 

[ppp]

There was enough room, have you considered the information that you’re plugging into your equation might be faulty? You’re assuming you have the correct information.

I don't think that you read my post very closely. Not enough room is just one of the dozens of problems with the Ark myth.

 

[Sheldon]

Of course I believe the story of Noah’s Ark and it’s not a myth like you assume. It’s seems that people may be using faulty information and calculations when they make the “myth” statements thinking there wasn’t enough room in the Ark for all the animals God brought to the Ark to save and repopulate the earth after the Flood.

There has never been any global flood, this is a geological fact. Denying this is as idiotic as denying the fact of species evolution. What does it say about a belief that it requires you to continually deny known facts.