Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Yes, this is me stating that God is something that warrants belief, and the evidence is compelling to me.So this is you stating that belief is warranted? That you're sure of this?
This is you stating that I am of the wrong mindset or just being obstinate? And you are sure of this?
No, that was you who stated that... You said:
“For me to be wrong, it would have to mean that the evidence for God IS compelling, and it is just that I am of the wrong mindset, or obstinate, etc. Because that's the reason I don't believe the claims.”
Since I believe that the evidence for God IS compelling, I said “yep.”
No, I am not sure you are of the wrong mindset or obstinate. There might be another reason you do not SEE the evidence that I consider compelling.
What is wrong with having free will? Is it because it forces you to make choices? If we had no free will now could we do anything? We would just be God’s puppets on a string. Is that what you want? God does not want puppets. Humans are made in the image of God and God has free will so we have free will.And this is one of the reasons I couldn't worship unless there was a huge show, by God, of actually caring about the human race and the Earth enough to get over His (supposed) foolish obsession with "free will." God can want whatever He wants - even I, who do not believe in Him, understand this, because we humans are the same way. But what God wants DOES NOT HAVE TO BE SEEN AS "GOOD" TO ME. I can disagree with the things God is reported to have done. I can morally judge God and decide that He isn't worth my time, even if He does exist. And this is where I stand. Even if it is proven that God exists, it will only be proven to me that a gigantic butthole of a supreme being exists somewhere who is entirely foolhardy and incredibly dopey. Again, this is according to me, and what I am able to experience and understand.
You are preaching to the choir. I do not like everything God does, but unlike you, I am stuck believing He exists so I try to figure out what God did what He did and does what He does and does not do what He does not do.
The main thing I do not like about what God did was create this material world and force us to live in it for 80 years or so. This world is a storehouse of suffering, at least for some of us.... Okay, then I am supposed to be grateful that I am finally released from that suffering after about 80 or more years, because then I get to go to a spiritual world (afterlife) that I know hardly anything about and I am stuck living there forever whether I like it or not – Yee-haw!
I have no complaints about how God communicates to humans – Messengers – I just wish they would say more about the afterlife, because after all, that is supposed to be the main act of the play and that is why believers are supposed to make all these sacrifices.
The tools you have access to are your brain and you have access to what has been revealed by God through Baha’u’llah... That is the best way you will ever be able to understand what God did/does and why God did/does what God did/does.But, then again, how could God expect me to use anything besides the tools I have access to? If it takes incredibly cosmic vision in order to understand God's actual plan, and how certain parts of it are "good," then how can God ever expect me to understand given that I do not have such cosmic perspective on my vision? And if I have no hope of understanding, then I am the kind of person to not care about the thing that I am being told can't be understood. You say I "can't understand?" Fine... I won't even try then, because according to that "logic" (hahaha) there is absolutely no point.
I did not say you cannot understand. You CAN understand a lot, but not everything. Humans will never understand everything, but there is two reasonswhy everything is not revealed by the Messengers: (1) we do not need to know it, and/or (2) we could not understand it even if we knew.
I never said that you should admit that other people are right, I said you should admit that you “might” be wrong about God.But the problem is, all the "reasons" people say I should admit they are right "before the fact" all seem terribly inadequate to me. The only way I could "come to realize I was wrong" would be to actually receive some incontrovertible evidence. Besides that, there's absolutely no reason to believe. Everything that isn't incontrovertible that I have seen thus far looks like piles of dog crap to me.
Evidence that is incontrovertible to me and other Baha’is is not incontrovertible to you because you do not interpret the evidence the same way, as evidence for God. Do you see the problem?
The only way you could ever change would be to admit you could be wrong about the evidence being like dog crap, but that would require you being open-minded enough to look at the evidence differently, or to look at it at all, if you have not looked. How can you know it is dog crap if you never looked at it? Have you just decided that if God communicates using a Messenger that is dog crap? There is nowhere to go with that because God ONLY communicates via Messengers.
No, nobody can know exactly what would happen if God appeared on earth. That passage has a meaning that apparently you did not understand, so let me explain it. If the full Essence of God showed upon earth, nobody would question that God exists. However, God’s power is so great that all created things would be completely destroyed if God “showed up.” Another thing that would happen if God showed up is that there would be no way to differentiate the godly people from the ungodly people because everyone would know God exists since it would be obvious if God showed up. With the “everyone” are ungodly people who do not deserve to know that God exists. If they were godly, they would be willing to do the necessary work in order to determine that God exists; they would not need God to show up and prove He exists.What anyone thinks or is told will happen if God appears is irrelevant. No one can know this information. To have written anything with a definitive air about this subject is FOLLY. It is foolishness, paraded as wisdom. And what that last sentence should say is this:
How, then, can the godly be differentiated from nothing?
And the truthful answer is that it cannot.