Does God welcome everyone into heaven?

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

I explained why I believe in the Cross and not the Resurrection. It is not because of what the Bible says, it is because of what my religion teaches about the Cross and the Resurrection.

Here is what Baha'u'llah wrote about the Cross, which shows that Baha'is believe Jesus died on the Cross:

“Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things...... Through Him, the unchaste and wayward were healed. Through His power, born of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the sinner sanctified.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 85-86

I do not believe that Jesus rose from the grave. The following is what Baha'is believe about the Resurrection.

“According to the Bahá’í teaching the Resurrection has nothing to do with the gross physical body. That body, once dead, is done with. It becomes decomposed and its atoms will never be recomposed into the same body.

Resurrection is the birth of the individual to spiritual life, through the gift of the Holy Spirit bestowed through the Manifestation of God. The grave from which he arises is the grave of ignorance and negligence of God. The sleep from which he awakens is the dormant spiritual condition in which many await the dawn of the Day of God. This dawn illumines all who have lived on the face of the earth, whether they are in the body or out of the body, but those who are spiritually blind cannot perceive it. The Day of Resurrection is not a day of twenty-four hours, but an era which has now begun and will last as long as the present world cycle continues. It will continue when all traces of the present civilization will have been wiped off the surface of the globe.”
Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 222

Why can't I? There are Christians who share my view that the bodily resurrection never happened.

Well, that is my whole point. You don't believe the Bible. Which is fine, go ahead and believe your faith. But don't lie to yourself and others that you believe the Bible.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, that is my whole point. You don't believe the Bible. Which is fine, go ahead and believe your faith. But don't lie to yourself and others that you believe the Bible.

No, I do not believe everything that is in the Bible, but I believe some things that are in the Bible.

 

[Trailblazer]

And I use the example of the Mormons to show how even in modern times a story that sounds like fiction to most of us, is believed by the Mormons to be true. And the religion works for them. Just like your Baha'i story works for you. And I'd agree, in most ways it makes way more sense than the beliefs of other religions... except for one thing... progressive revelation.

Baha'is claim that the spiritual teachings stay the same, only the "social" teachings change. For me, they don't all have to be tied together. I'm fine with different people coming up with different Gods and different beliefs. It is obviously not the same message. But I don't even believe that some of those people that Baha'is say are "manifestations" really were. Actually, I think there is a good chance some of them were fictional. But Adam, Noah and Abraham and even Moses, I don't think fit the Baha'is definition of a "manifestation". And I don't think Jews think they were anything more than ordinary men.

I think that at the end of the day it all boils down to what makes the most sense to us and what fits with our values and what consider important in life. That is why I am a Baha'i and not some other religion, but also it is because I see evidence that the Baha'i Faith is the truth from God whereas i do not see that much evidence for the other religions. I mean we know that Baha'u'llah existed and we have depictions of His character from people who knew Him, we have a chronicled history of the Faith from 1844 onward,and we have the original writings of Baha'u'llah. So even without the fulfillment of prophecies we have so much more verifiable evidence than any other religion in history.

You get so hung up in so many details of the Bible and the Baha'i Faith that you cannot see the forest through the trees, so there will always be a reason for you to have doubts, apparently. It is kind of like opening up this country. Eventually the governments will have to move forward, but right now they are lost in a morass of details.

 

[ManSinha]

So even without the fulfillment of prophecies we have so much more verifiable evidence than any other religion in history.

Do not make absolute statements - the Sikh religion has as much if not more verifiable evidence since we had 10 Masters over a 230 year period - all of whom wrote their teachings down which are then compiled and collected and cross verified. You have been told before - you are indoctrinated and blind to what else is around - believe in the Baha'i faith by all means if you would like but do not make generalized statements that are false and can be easily debunked. I can go on and rip every argument you make apart - but that is not my intention. Just stop making generalized statements as if they were true.

Face the fact - the Baha'i religion is not the panacea you claim it to be. No religion is. The amount of time you spend here proselytizing and defending your beliefs speaks volumes. You have gotten negative posts disagreeing with you from virtually every poster you engage with. It should tell you something.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

No, I do not believe everything that is in the Bible, but I believe some things that are in the Bible.

Because you don't believe the Bible, whatever 'things' you say you believe, mean nothing concerning the Bible. They are just 'your' selection to support your other faith. In other words, you use the Bible but do not believe the Bible.

You don't get to choose what is true and what is not true in the Bible. And how you make such a choice, you still fail to explain. Just because that is what your faith says doesn't explain how you or they arrive at the conclusion that the Cross is true, but the Resurrection is not. It is inconsistent.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[BilliardsBall]

Jesus said nothing about a free gift in those verses.

Matthew 25:45-46 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Jesus never said anything about the saved and unsaved people, and God does not divide people into two groups. Saved is a Church teaching based upon original sin, but Jesus knew nothing of original sin. Jesus taught that faith and works were both necessary to gain eternal life.

I beg to differ with you when you state that only those who receive the 'free gift' go on to help people. I know many atheists who help people and I consider them more spiritual than Christians who do what they do for a reward in heaven. There is nothing spiritual about expecting a free ride.

There is a difference in the saved--part of the Matthew 25 discussion--which in context is about Jewish people in the end times, by the way (servants). Atheists cannot love their enemies and atheists break around 6 of the 10 commandments of Exodus 20 right off the bat.

John 3:16 says nothing about a free gift? "Whoever trusts Jesus shall NOT be condemned!"

 

[GardenLady]

I think it was CS Lewis who wrote something like, "in the end, there are those who say too God "thy will be done," and those to whom God says "thy will be done." The latter being those who reject him. I do not think that those who actively reject him will be saved.

There is an aspect of this whole thing that I find very challenging. Some people are born with significant cognitive damage and do not have the capacity for understanding or faith. Does God exclude these people from salvation because of their lack of capacity (which is a feature of their physical bodies and not their souls)? I think not.

But on the other hand, there are people who have a complete lack of empathy and spend their lives being destructive to all around them -- we commonly call them psychopaths. Some experts say psychopaths are born and sociopaths are made. If someone is truly born a psychopath due to something wrong in their brain, des this mitigate culpability for their lack of empathy and their destructive behavior? Surely Ted Bundy knew that what he was doing was wrong, didn't he?

 

[Trailblazer]

Because you don't believe the Bible, whatever 'things' you say you believe, mean nothing concerning the Bible. They are just 'your' selection to support your other faith. In other words, you use the Bible but do not believe the Bible.

You do not know what I believe or my intentions.
I believe that the Bible is God's greatest testimony to His creatures, but I do not believe that everything recorded in it "literally" happened.

Apparently, you are unable to see anything from any perspective except your own.

You don't get to choose what is true and what is not true in the Bible. And how you make such a choice, you still fail to explain. Just because that is what your faith says doesn't explain how you or they arrive at the conclusion that the Cross is true, but the Resurrection is not. It is inconsistent.

No, I do not get to choose what is true and what is not in the Bible, but I do get to choose what "I believe" is true and not in the Bible because I have free will.

I explained how and why I made the choice, more than once.
What my Faith says explains is how I arrived at the conclusion that the Cross is true, but the "bodily" Resurrection is not true. That is because "I believe" that the Prophet Founder of my Faith knew what happened at the cross and what happened afterwards.

 

[Trailblazer]

There is a difference in the saved--part of the Matthew 25 discussion--which in context is about Jewish people in the end times, by the way (servants). Atheists cannot love their enemies and atheists break around 6 of the 10 commandments of Exodus 20 right off the bat.

Atheists can love their enemies and they can follow most of the 10 commandments.
Do Christians follow all of those commandments, what about keeping the Sabbath Day holy?

John 3:16 says nothing about a free gift? "Whoever trusts Jesus shall NOT be condemned!"

But that is not what John 3:16 says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

That is a guarantee of everlasting life for believers, but it says nothing about atheists being condemned.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

You do not know what I believe or my intentions.
I believe that the Bible is God's greatest testimony to His creatures, but I do not believe that everything recorded in it "literally" happened.

Apparently, you are unable to see anything from any perspective except your own.

No, I do not get to choose what is true and what is not in the Bible, but I do get to choose what "I believe" is true and not in the Bible because I have free will.

I explained how and why I made the choice, more than once.
What my Faith says explains is how I arrived at the conclusion that the Cross is true, but the "bodily" Resurrection is not true. That is because "I believe" that the Prophet Founder of my Faith knew what happened at the cross and what happened afterwards.

I do know what you believe and your intentions as you have stated them. Your other faith, as opposed to the Christian faith, dictates your belief concerning the Bible. You want to say you believe the Bible, but that is a lie. You don't believe the Bible. You use the Bible to support your 'other faith'. You select certain things you want to believe and reject certain you don't. What ever supports your faith.

You choose to believe your 'prophet' who is the founder of your faith. Good. No problem. You believe his writings. That means you don't believe the Bible. And that is no problem until you say you believe the Bible. Because you don't.

Are you that dependent on the Christian faith to the degree that you cannot let go and embrace your other faith? Are you scared to really say I don't believe the Bible? Don't be scared. The God of the Bible doesn't care for your middle of the road confession anyway. (Rev. 3:15-16) I know, I know, that is just one of those verses you don't believe.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Trailblazer]

I do know what you believe and your intentions as you have stated them. Your other faith, as opposed to the Christian faith, dictates your belief concerning the Bible. You want to say you believe the Bible, but that is a lie. You don't believe the Bible. You use the Bible to support your 'other faith'. You select certain things you want to believe and reject certain you don't. What ever supports your faith.

You choose to believe your 'prophet' who is the founder of your faith. Good. No problem. You believe his writings. That means you don't believe the Bible. And that is no problem until you say you believe the Bible. Because you don't.

Are you that dependent on the Christian faith to the degree that you cannot let go and embrace your other faith? Are you scared to really say I don't believe the Bible? Don't be scared. The God of the Bible doesn't care for your middle of the road confession anyway. (Rev. 3:15-16) I know, I know, that is just one of those verses you don't believe.

Good-Ole-Rebel

The only reason I believe in the Bible at all is because my religion teaches that the Bible is God's greatest testimony to His creatures. I would never believe in the Bible otherwise because it has so many inconsistencies, and let's be honest: there is no way the NT is the exact words of Jesus and it might not even be close. That opens up a Pandora's Box.

Obviously, I am not going to convince you that I believe in the Bible because you can only see it from your own perspective, so it is best that I now bow out gracefully.

 

[Trailblazer]

Who decided those requirements?

I fail to see a huge difference between God demanding something in particular from us compared to him setting requirements for getting into heaven. Can you give an example of where this is not ultimately the same?

God decided on the requirements because God sets the standards for human behavior by revealing teachings and laws through the Messengers. God does not demand that we follow His teachings or laws but rather we do so by virtue of our own free will, so that is why demands are not the same as requirements. I hope that makes sense.

And now we have to wait another what 800 years? Seriously? And by that time, another messenger might come, what if that person is a native indian, an Eskimo which live in a remote area and hardly anyone on Earth understand their language... the whole setup really doesn't make a lot of sense. It is so convenient the way it works, that one would assume that humans came up with it.

From my perspective, humanity has what it needs for the next 1000 years, from the year 1852, so there is no need for another Messenger until at least that date. What happened in the past is irrelevant because the past is gone.

It is interesting that you mention where the next Messenger might appear, because God sends these Messengers to the location and culture that in most need at that time in history. That is why the Bab and Baha’u’llah appeared in Persia:

PERSIA’S STATE OF DECADENCE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

That description begins on page xxxviii and concludes on page xlviii.

Exactly, but if they were directly instructed by God, there ought to be no confusion at all, it would be like having 10000s Baha'u'llahs all around the world, completely independent of each other saying the exact same things. And even then it would be near impossible to believe that they were actually messengers of God. But at least it would be a lot smarter move by God, if he wanted to communicate with us.

You are funny Nimos. Why would we need 10000s of Baha’u’llah’s around the world? Think about it. If they all came with the same message and said exactly the same things, why would we need more than one? If people find it near impossible to believe one Messenger, think how much more difficult it would be to believe in so many more. I mean each and every one would have to provide proof of who they were.

The only reason one could really argue why there would be so many contradictions, is because they would not be send from God, Therefore it is conveniently claimed that there can't be another messenger before another 1000 years have passed. Just think about, how amazingly lucky it is that God's capabilities are not able to handle more than one messenger at the time. While at the same time, the person chosen to be this messenger can't proof it. To me it almost sounds too good to be true.

The reason why God does not send more than one Messenger at a time is not because of God’s capabilities, it is because we only need one Messenger at a time. Baha’u’llah’s only job was to receive the revelation from God, organize a small community of followers, proclaim His message to the kings and rulers and religious leaders of His time, and to write scriptures. After He died, it was the responsibility of the Baha’is to carry the message far and wide, so they were like the messengers for the Messenger and that is how the message spreads.

Baha’u’llah did offer proof to support His claim, it is just too bad more people do not look at it and take it seriously because it is almost too good to be true.

We need more messengers and proof of people claiming this, due to simple validity of what they claim. Throughout all of human history and even today, people have scammed each other into believing things that are not true.

If we had more Messengers then they would all have to provide proof and it would be an even bigger problem than we have now with one Messenger to investigate.

You convince people that something is true and that they can trust this due to faith.
You fill people with false hope, if they just commit to it. And when it then doesn't work, its not because of God, its because they failed or didn't pray enough.

That is precisely why nobody should ever allow other people to convince them that a religion is true but rather they should conduct their own independent investigation.

So lets say that throughout history, there have been 100000 religions. You choose to be a Bahai, that basically mean that 99999 of all religions have been wrong. How incredible lucky is that.

Nope, it would not mean that Nimos. If you chose Baha’i it would only mean that is the most current religion that God has revealed, but any of the others that were revealed by God were also true. Their spiritual teachings would all be true because those are eternal, but their primary message and their social teachings and laws would no longer be pertinent to this age in history since they were revealed for a different age in history.

So based on the mere fact that this is clearly the case, the most obvious approach to any religion is that they are not true.

So based upon what I just said, the most obvious approach to any true (divinely revealed) religion is that they are true; however, only the most current religion is ‘pertinent’ to the current age we live in.

And therefore it is crucial that they can provide evidence, that are far more comprehensive than simply a person claiming to be something. To me, that people are so poor at demanding and understanding evidence, must be the biggest miracle or mystery in human history so far. It makes so little sense to me.

Of course they would have to provide a lot of evidence, not just make a claim. Anyone can make a claim. I see people on this forum who ‘claim’ that God communicated with them in some way, but why would I believe that? All I have is their claim.

Again as I said in the last reply, then screw God.

Screw God just because he does not do what you want Him to do?

Think about it logically Nimos. Let’s say that God did everything that everyone wanted Him to do instead of what He chose to do. That would be putting humans on a level with God, as if they know more about what is best for them than God knows. I mean if God is All-Knowing and All-Wise, God has to know more than any human about what is best for humans.

He didn't help us during WW1 or 2 or any other war, that have caused suffering to millions and millions of people, the spanish flu, The black death and other natural disasters, he doesn't help people that are sick or starve... so what exactly is he doing. Absolutely nothing, so God chooses to do nothing, besides sending us a messenger to spread confusion every 1000 year... so seriously why even bother with him? Why do you care about God in the first place?

I understand your sentiments about the do-nothing God. The only reason I bother with God is because I know He exists and I know what He revealed through Baha’u’llah is in my best interest and in the best interests of humanity. If I did not believe that I would be an atheist, given how I feel about God much of the time. But as you can see by the threads I post, I am struggling to make sense of God, what he is really like and what he is doing or not doing.

This is exactly what all religious people does, there is always someone or something else to blame, never God, Jesus, Baha'u'llah etc. Always our fault, despite me just pointing out above, that God have done nothing to help us. If he cares about us and is all powerful, and chooses not to help, that makes him evil!!

I do not think you ever saw me blaming atheists for being atheists. I just try to explain how I believe God operates. God does not ‘come on down’ to Earth to help humans out, except when He sends Messengers, but God knows that people will help other people when they need help, because they do.

Just wondering, so lets assume that it will be around 800 years before the next one, do you imagine that God is just sitting there looking at us and thinking "That didn't go as planned. I thought Baha'u'llah would have done a lot better."

God would only be thinking that if it did not go as God knew it would go, but that is impossible, because God is All-Knowing. God’s Plan has to unfold according to God’s will because God’s will cannot be thwarted.

If God was thinking anything, He would be thinking “I thought the Baha’is would have done a lot better in getting the message out." In that case, God would have to hold the next Messenger back until the message of Baha’u’llah succeeded in accomplishing what it was intended to accomplish.

So lets get some things on the table then. So disregard the messengers, what would you say that God have done, that is not directly the result of humans intelligence? (Meaning any cures for disease etc, that have been discovered by humans etc.) How can we see the effect of God on Earth?

God has not done anything except for creating intelligent humans. God cannot take any credit for any cures for disease humans come up with.

Because they make him incompetent, im sorry its not a lot different than what you are doing. Saying that he can't do this and that, because that not how he works, first of all how do you know? (Guess its from Baha'u'llah) Secondly, constantly claiming that God is all good and all powerful, and then adding one limitation after another on him, simply makes him incompetent. The way he choose to do things, like with the messengers.

I never said that God can’t do anything; I only ever said that God does not do everything He can do. God choosing to use Messengers is not because of a limitation, it is because of a choice God makes. That does not mean God is incompetent, except in the eyes atheists.

On another note, I just saw Denmark on the world news. They said your country was one of the first to open because you did it right and showed some pictures of the children. I wish I could say the same for the United States. We are still in a mess and I do not see an end in sight yet. I am hunkered down at home except for two brief trips to the grocery store a week. I do not mind being at home, I actually prefer it, but not at the expense of all the suffering of others. It’s almost unreal.

 

[Nimos]

God decided on the requirements because God sets the standards for human behavior by revealing teachings and laws through the Messengers. God does not demand that we follow His teachings or laws but rather we do so by virtue of our own free will, so that is why demands are not the same as requirements. I hope that makes sense.

Would you agree to the following. Pretty much any human that have ever lived on Earth, unless there is something genetically wrong with them, aim towards living a happy and fulfilling life?

So certain things we can consider as being not desired, like suffering, being psychologically hurt, starving, sick and ultimately die as well as a lot of other things which also reduce quality of life. Now lets say that everything opposite to these improve the quality of life.

With that in mind, how do you think that affects us when we have to make choices?

So lets say you have to go from point A to point B, you can either go straight ahead through a burning building, which will reduce the trip by 10 minutes or you could choose to go around which take a bit longer?

Going through the burning building is not really a choice, because you know that it will hurt you and again reduce quality of life.

So what we can do is apply heaven and hell to this scenario, so the burning building is hell and going around is heaven. Basically there is no difference. The idea behind heaven and hell is exactly that, you play on peoples fear.

Again no one forces or demand that you go around the burning building, the choice is yours. But if everything that improve your quality of life is found by going around it, obviously that would be the correct choice. The difference here is that "God" have made the scenario and packed it, like its a reasonable set of options.

If this type of choice should make any sense in regards to free will, it would have to be like this.

You have to go from point A to B, if you choose the left path, you will loose your left foot. If you take the right, then you loose your right foot.

Do you see the difference, why talking about free will in the last example makes sense and not in the first one?

It is interesting that you mention where the next Messenger might appear, because God sends these Messengers to the location and culture that in most need at that time in history. That is why the Bab and Baha’u’llah appeared in Persia:

But that makes no sense, its like looking at humans as group of robots, with absolutely no care to the individual. What does it matter in the eyes of a human that is living a poor live. Lets say a person starving in Africa and suffering day in and day out. Imagine God having to explain to this person that overall Africa is not doing bad enough compared to Syria, so he can't really help him at this time. Im sorry, but it makes so little sense.
Even the fact that this can be split into cultures and locations... think about it for a second....

God is looking at Earth based on cultures and countries and depending on how bad each of these are doing, he decide where a messenger should appear?

So basically what we could do, is gather all the people from all countries that are doing bad and put them in Australia and all those which do well there, we move to other places, then we know that the next messenger will come there right?

Again, if this is really what Bahai's believe in, it makes God such an incompetent excuse for a joke, that I really can't see how anyone can believe in it. And im sorry for putting it like that, but its simply insane to picture a being that is suppose to be all wise, all powerful and all loving to work in such ways.

Think about it, God doesn't give a flying turd about anyone, he is purely interested in statistical data of which region/country is doing the worse and then based on that, he decide to send them a messenger, which can do absolutely nothing for them. How is a messenger going to help people that are starving or living in the worse poverty imaginable. Unless this messenger is like Jesus and can turn water into wine or feed thousands of people with a couple of breads and fish or what it was.

You are funny Nimos. Why would we need 10000s of Baha’u’llah’s around the world? Think about it. If they all came with the same message and said exactly the same things, why would we need more than one?

That is why, I wrote that even if that happened it would be near impossible to believe in. But at least it would make more sense for God to do, as these people speak in different languages. As you have mentioned yourself (If I recall correctly), the writings of Baha'u'llah have yet not been translated so everyone can understand them.

So having 10000s of them going around spreading the word and teaching would make a lot more sense, especially if you backed this up by them performing miracles, like healing the sick, creating food out of thin air, walking on water, bringing back the dead. All that would really help, even though I know that you don't think miracles are required, I would really disagree. Miracles would make the whole difference. Because that would let us study them, and if these turned out to be true miracles, obviously it would lay the foundation for God to really make an entrance

Baha’u’llah did offer proof to support His claim, it is just too bad more people do not look at it and take it seriously because it is almost too good to be true.

I recall you showing me these proofs/predictions, but lets be honest, they are not really strong, compared to what you would expect or require.

If we had more Messengers then they would all have to provide proof and it would be an even bigger problem than we have now with one Messenger to investigate.

No, the problem is that God send these messenger with no ability to proof who they are. That is the issue!
The amount of messengers is irrevant, if they could truly prove it. Again having someone under controlled conditions, bring back the dead, heal the sick, walk on water etc. Would go such a long way. But God does not seem to understand this either, he still think that blind faith is the best way, which makes no sense, when he can see that people demand evidence for these claims more than ever.

Nope, it would not mean that Nimos. If you chose Baha’i it would only mean that is the most current religion that God has revealed, but any of the others that were revealed by God were also true. Their spiritual teachings would all be true because those are eternal, but their primary message and their social teachings and laws would no longer be pertinent to this age in history since they were revealed for a different age in history.

But this again end in a checkmate as I also described in the last post about how religions works. Because obviously you believe that there is not going to be another messenger for the next 800 years, therefore Bahai must be the right one.

Lets try to compare that to the other big religions. Why do you think Jesus would warn about false prophets and that people should stay away from these?
So imagine you are back in time, before Baha'u'llah... why is it important for a religion to make it, so no one can claim to be a new prophet or authority?

Why is it that Muhammad is considered the last prophet by muslims and that it is important to make it, so that no one will come after him?

Now how does that differ from Bahai saying that a messenger will only occur once every 1000 years, far longer than a human lifespan?

So based upon what I just said, the most obvious approach to any true (divinely revealed) religion is that they are true; however, only the most current religion is ‘pertinent’ to the current age we live in.

So looking at the above about why it is important for religions to claim that no one else is going to replace them. Is largely to do with each religion claiming to be the final authority, the one and only true religion.

No one will come after Jesus, because this is the right religion. No one will come after Muhammad because that is the final true religion. No one will come after Baha'u'llah because he is the final religion. Doesn't matter if you add 1000 years or ever, the idea is exactly the same.

Screw God just because he does not do what you want Him to do?

Think about it logically Nimos. Let’s say that God did everything that everyone wanted Him to do instead of what He chose to do. That would be putting humans on a level with God, as if they know more about what is best for them than God knows. I mean if God is All-Knowing and All-Wise, God has to know more than any human about what is best for humans.

That is not true, you do whatever you can for your cats. Obviously you are limited by being a mere human, but you taking as best care of them as you can, does not make them human. At most it makes them happy.

Its no different than God compared to humans, we would be considered less than ants in comparison, even if he healed all of us, brought peace and harmony.... heaven to Earth. He would still be the creator and God and we would be his cats, just being slightly happier overall than we are now.

I do not think you ever saw me blaming atheists for being atheists. I just try to explain how I believe God operates. God does not ‘come on down’ to Earth to help humans out, except when He sends Messengers, but God knows that people will help other people when they need help, because they do.

I weren't speaking of you in regards to atheists, it was more of a general statement, as there a countries where being atheist is punishable by death. But its everyone, not only atheists. The biggest difference is that atheists are being killed or "violated", for something we don't even believe in and for most of us, don't even care about.

Sort of like you being able to be punished by death if you don't believe in unicorns... how absurd would that be

God has not done anything except for creating intelligent humans. God cannot take any credit for any cures for disease humans come up with.

That didn't really answer my question

Where do you see the effect of God?

On another note, I just saw Denmark on the world news. They said your country was one of the first to open because you did it right and showed some pictures of the children. I wish I could say the same for the United States. We are still in a mess and I do not see an end in sight yet. I am hunkered down at home except for two brief trips to the grocery store a week. I do not mind being at home, I actually prefer it, but not at the expense of all the suffering of others. It’s almost unreal.

Saw that the US is hit really hard, but not only because of the virus, but now you also have the mass unemployment etc. It seems to me, that the US system is far worse at dealing with these crisis than we are, simply due to how we do things here. The mere fact that we have completely free healthcare for everyone, makes it so much easier and less stressful for everyone.

Can only imagine the frustration that those in the US that have been fired must feel... It could completely ruin them if they get sick.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Atheists can love their enemies and they can follow most of the 10 commandments.
Do Christians follow all of those commandments, what about keeping the Sabbath Day holy?

But that is not what John 3:16 says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

That is a guarantee of everlasting life for believers, but it says nothing about atheists being condemned.

Every person breaks the ten commandments, even born agains, my point being that atheists break more of them then Christians by rejecting God, taking idols, etc.

John 3:16 offers the free gift of eternal life to ANYONE WHO TRUSTS. "Whosoever trusts".

Atheists are condemned if they've not been born again, just as anyone else who isn't PERFECT to enter the perfect place that comes.

 

[Trailblazer]

Atheists are condemned if they've not been born again, just as anyone else who isn't PERFECT to enter the perfect place that comes.

Only God can condemn anyone, and God doeth whatsoever He chooseth.

According to my beliefs...

"...... But we must always remember that our existence and everything we have or ever will have is dependent upon the mercy of God and His bounty, and therefore He can accept into His heaven, which is really nearness to Him, even the lowliest if He pleases. We always have the hope of receiving His mercy if we reach out for it."
(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, January 12, 1957)

From: Lights of Guidance (second part): A Bahá'í Reference File

 

[CG Didymus]

You get so hung up in so many details of the Bible and the Baha'i Faith that you cannot see the forest through the trees, so there will always be a reason for you to have doubts, apparently. It is kind of like opening up this country. Eventually the governments will have to move forward, but right now they are lost in a morass of details.

Yes, if the details aren't important, the Baha'i Faith is great... and so are all the other religions. Like you say, Christianity has some nice music. Who cares about the details. I can join them and sing away. Or, I can join the Hare Krishnas and sing and dance. I don't care about the details about what they believe. But, we all know that religious leaders lie and all religions believe different things. Checking out what people believe and why is important. And I don't think that not to worry about the details isn't what the Baha'is mean when they say to personally investigate the truth. So let's see... Detail... Ishmael or Isaac taken to be sacrificed? Who cares. Jesus rose physically from the dead? Not important. Without Jesus, God will send people to hell? Yeah, like that's nothing to concern myself over. Many false prophets will come? So, what's the big deal? Yeah, you're right. Nothing to worry about. Why sweat the little unimportant details.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

But on the other hand, there are people who have a complete lack of empathy and spend their lives being destructive to all around them -- we commonly call them psychopaths. Some experts say psychopaths are born and sociopaths are made. If someone is truly born a psychopath due to something wrong in their brain, des this mitigate culpability for their lack of empathy and their destructive behavior? Surely Ted Bundy knew that what he was doing was wrong, didn't he?

Good question. Years ago, I made a thread asking that question in the Christian DIR and it never got a reply. I'm still not sure how to answer that. I guess the best answer a believer could come up with is "God knows best" and leave it in his hands.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Only God can condemn anyone, and God doeth whatsoever He chooseth.

According to my beliefs...

"...... But we must always remember that our existence and everything we have or ever will have is dependent upon the mercy of God and His bounty, and therefore He can accept into His heaven, which is really nearness to Him, even the lowliest if He pleases. We always have the hope of receiving His mercy if we reach out for it."
(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, January 12, 1957)

From: Lights of Guidance (second part): A Bahá'í Reference File

Yes, fortunately, we know on what basis God condemns or approves, in both instances, it has to do with whether or not Christ transforms us, to be made morally perfect.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, fortunately, we know on what basis God condemns or approves, in both instances, it has to do with whether or not Christ transforms us, to be made morally perfect.

I do not believe that Christ is the "only one" who can transform us.
I do not believe that any human being can become "morally perfect."

 

[Trailblazer]

Checking out what people believe and why is important. And I don't think that not to worry about the details isn't what the Baha'is mean when they say to personally investigate the truth. So let's see... Detail... Ishmael or Isaac taken to be sacrificed? Who cares. Jesus rose physically from the dead? Not important. Without Jesus, God will send people to hell? Yeah, like that's nothing to concern myself over. Many false prophets will come? So, what's the big deal? Yeah, you're right. Nothing to worry about. Why sweat the little unimportant details.

Why is it important what other people believe? It should not matter at all. It should only matter what YOU believe. Imo, you need to SEPARATE from these other people and think for yourself.

I told you why Baha’is believe that it is not important if Ishmael or Isaac was taken to be sacrificed. This quote from the Universal House of Justice explains it:

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet. A striking example is given in the account of the sacrifice which Abraham was called upon to make. The Guardian of the Faith confirms that the record in the Qur'an and the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, namely that it was Ishmael, and not Isaac as stated in the Old Testament, whom Abraham was to sacrifice, is to be upheld. In one of His Tablets 'Abdu'l-Bahá refers to this discrepancy, and explains that, from a spiritual point of view, it is irrelevant which son was involved. The essential part of the story is that Abraham was willing to obey God's command to sacrifice His son. Thus, although the account in the Torah is inaccurate in detail, it is true in substance....

...The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments​

It is perfectly understandable why the OT recorded that incorrectly, given how long ago it was written and who wrote it. Do you really believe the OT is inerrant? Do you really believe the NT is inerrant?

Imo it does not MATTER if Jesus rose from the dead, because that has nothing to do with the reason Jesus was sent by God:

John 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

This is precisely why getting caught up in the details is not good, because then you lose sight of the actual mission of Jesus. Surely the resurrection is not a detail to the Christians but you are not a Christian so I am hard pressed to understand why it matters to you, unless you still think it might be the truth.

“Without Jesus, God will send people to hell” is not a detail to Christians because they believe it, but do you believe it? If not, why does it MATTER what Christians believe? Can’t you separate yourself from Christian beliefs and decide for yourself what YOU BELIEVE is true?

“Many false prophets will come?” So, what's the big deal? Unless you BELIEVE that Baha’u’llah is a false prophet, what IS the big deal? Please bear in mind that it is completely illogical to say that just because many false prophets will come, a true Prophet will not come. Jesus also said Matthew 7:16-17 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. These verses indicate that there are good trees (true Prophets), not just false prophets.

Why would Jesus bother to say "Ye shall know them by their fruits" if no true Prophets were going to come?
If one actually reads the verses and applies logic they are way out ahead of the game.