Does it really matter if we believe in God?

[Trailblazer]

Ah, I see. So you're excluding religions that might have the numbers but that don't fit this criterion...

Numbers do not make a religion. According to my criteria, a religion is based upon a Revelation from God to a Messenger of God who founds the religion.

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

 

[Trailblazer]

This basically excludes virtually all of the world religions. I think your criteria is too self serving.

I think that my criteria includes all of the world religions.
What world religions do you think were not founded by some kind of Messenger, Prophet, or Holy Man? If they weren't, how can they be considered a "religion of God?"
How is this self serving? I do not get anything for myself from it, all I do is serve God.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Numbers do not make a religion. According to my criteria, a religion is based upon a Revelation from God to a Messenger of God who founds the religion.

“And now concerning thy question regarding the nature of religion. Know thou that they who are truly wise have likened the world unto the human temple. As the body of man needeth a garment to clothe it, so the body of mankind must needs be adorned with the mantle of justice and wisdom. Its robe is the Revelation vouchsafed unto it by God. Whenever this robe hath fulfilled its purpose, the Almighty will assuredly renew it. For every age requireth a fresh measure of the light of God. Every Divine Revelation hath been sent down in a manner that befitted the circumstances of the age in which it hath appeared.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 81

How then can it be a major religion? Surely a major religion has to have the numbers?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I think that my criteria includes all of the world religions.
What world religions do you think were not founded by some kind of Messenger, Prophet, or Holy Man? If they weren't, how can they be considered a "religion of God?"
How is this self serving? I do not get anything for myself from it, all I do is serve God.

How many prophets does Buddhism have? Toaism?

 

[Trailblazer]

How then can it be a major religion? Surely a major religion has to have the numbers?

A religion is not major just because it has a lot of believers. To me major means it has had a significant impact upon society and religious history. I consider Judaism a major religion even though it only has 14 million believers. But I also consider Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, and Islam major.

The Baha'i Faith only has 7 million believers, but it has not been around very long compared to any of the other religions, only about 156 years, so it has not had a chance to affect history or have a societal impact. In that sense I would not call it major yet.

The world's 20 largest religions and their number of believers are:

1. Christianity (2.1 billion)
2. Islam (1.3 billion)
3. Nonreligious (Secular/Agnostic/Atheist) (1.1 billion)
4. Hinduism (900 million)
5. Chinese traditional religion (394 million)
6. Buddhism 376 million
7. Primal-indigenous (300 million)
8. African traditional and Diasporic (100 million)
9. Sikhism (23 million)
10. Juche (19 million)
11. Spiritism (15 million)
12. Judaism (14 million)
13. Bahai (7 million)
14. Jainism (4.2 million)
15. Shinto (4 million)
16. Cao Dai (4 million)
17. Zoroastrianism (2.6 million)
18. Tenrikyo (2 million)
19. Neo-Paganism (1 million)
20. Unitarian-Universalism (800,000)

 

[Trailblazer]

How many prophets does Buddhism have? Toaism?

Buddhism has the Buddha.
Taoism does not have prophets but I do not consider Taoism a religion, it is more of a philosophy, a way of life.

 

[RESOLUTION]

Micha'el is an archangel, he is NOT the messiah. The time of turmoil precedes the messianic age. The messianic era is clearly a time of unparalleled peace.

I can't believe you can say this with a straight face. No only has there still be international warfare, but it's gotten bigger and uglier. Think of the Atom Bomb.

I'm sorry, but Jesus simply didn't fulfill the prophecies, thus, he is not the messiah.

Is there a particular messianic prophecy you would like to discuss?

Nowhere does it suggest Michael is the Messiah so why throw in something to hide the real issue being addressed.
Disappointed in you. It is clear that the Messiah at this point in the book of Daniel would have been established.
It is Michael having given all the information addressing the issue of the end times here.
So if the Messiah brings earthly peace and has already been established in his Kingdom how can Michael predict the distress at the very end
after the Messiahs kingdom established. Michael is the Arch Angel of Israel he guards them.



You do not want Jesus to fulfill the Prophecies but he fulfill the ones he is meant to fulfill.
Untill you can answer this simple prophecy how can you hope to discuss others from a position of understanding.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Buddhism has the Buddha.
Taoism does not have prophets but I do not consider Taoism a religion, it is more of a philosophy, a way of life.

The Buddha isn't really a prophet so much as a philosopher. And then he is only one, not three.

I don't see why you consider Taoism less of a religion than Buddhism.

Besides, things really begin to rock and roll when Taoism meets Buddhism. In my mind, I see the chocolate easter bunny meeting the jar of peanut butter LOL. "I've been waitin' for you, baby..."

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Nowhere does it suggest Michael is the Messiah so why throw in something to hide the real issue being addressed.
Disappointed in you. It is clear that the Messiah at this point in the book of Daniel would have been established.
It is Michael having given all the information addressing the issue of the end times here.
So if the Messiah brings earthly peace and has already been established in his Kingdom how can Michael predict the distress at the very end
after the Messiahs kingdom established. Michael is the Arch Angel of Israel he guards them.



You do not want Jesus to fulfill the Prophecies but he fulfill the ones he is meant to fulfill.
Untill you can answer this simple prophecy how can you hope to discuss others from a position of understanding.

Hello my friend!!!

I'm not sure why you have things out of order. It's quite simple. There is a time where things get very bad before they come into the ultimate order (the messianic age).

I'm glad I misunderstood you. There are a few people out there who think that the Archangel Michael is the messiah, and I was afraid for a moment that you were one of them. So glad that I was wrong.

It's not that I "don't want Jesus to fulfill the prophecies." I'm not for or against any particular person. I'm simply saying that it will be beyond obvious when the Messiah comes. The entire world will recognize him. All the prophecies will be fulfilled, not just some of them. Lots of people have tried to be the messiah. I say it's great that they tried -- but ultimately they failed. They were not the messiah. They simply didn't meet the criteria. That includes Jesus.

The very fact that "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation" has not happend is proof that no one in history has yet been the messiah. I wish you could see this for yourself.

In the meantime, all talks about the Messiah put aside...

Are you in fellowship with your fellow Jews? Do you attend a regular synagogue? I think that because you don't believe Jesus is God that your beliefs would only be considered weird but you would not be an apostate (check with Rabbi O on this, or call your local Rabbi and ask). As long as you don't go and start talking about Jesus, I should think you would be welcome with open arms. You could pray with us, celebrate with us, fast with us, repent with us, eat with us...LOL lots of eating.

Come home.

 

[Pudding]

Yes, that is probably why most people live for the material world, it makes them happy. That is what most people care about, being happy.

You don't live for the material world?
You don't live for your family and friends?
You don't live for your hobby?
You don't live for yourselves?

Do you care about if you are happy or not?
Do you want to be happy?
What is happy to you?
What can makes you happy?

I question whether personal happiness is what we should be living for. Since I believe in God I think there is a higher purpose for our existence than just to eat, drink and be merry and enjoy the physical pleasures.

We should not living for our personal happiness? What should we living for then?

Some christians version 1 say we should living for their denomination's God version 1.
Some christians version 2 say we should living for their God version 2.
Some christians version 3 say we should living for their God version 3...etc.
Some believers of Abrahamic religion/denomination version 300 say we should living for their religion's God version 300.
Some believers of Abrahamic religion version 301 say we should living for their God version 301.
Some believers of Abrahamic religion version 302 say we should living for their God version 302...etc.

I bet you will say we should live for your religion's version of God.

If you want to convince people to live for your version of God, you better provide evidence to prove the existence of your version of God, same to those other different kinds of believers who believe in different versions of Gods.

When I say “live for God” I do not mean that the way you apparently think. I mean live according to what God says is our purpose.

Thanks for clarify.

God does not need anything from humans, He just wants what is best for them. What is best for us is to sacrifice our selfish desires for the good of other people.

I see, that's what you believe.

Please also provide evidence to backup your claims if you want to convince anyone to believe what you believe, thank you.

Thanks. Those are good answers.

Your welcome.

Essentially it means that they are not worth bothering with, not worthy of our attention, like a mirage in the desert we think is really great, but later come to discover it was nothing at all. I can further elucidate on that if you are interested. It is a big subject.

I see, your religion order you to regard everything and everyone (except your God) as not worth bothering with and not worthy of your attention. I think that is a rather scary idea.

For example (hypothetically):

- You're crossing a road. According to your religion's book, the cars passing by is not worthy of your attention, you should only pay attention to your God. As a result you cross the road without paying any attention of those cars. That's very dangerous.

- A robber break into your house.
Robber: Give me your money if you cares about your lives.
According to your religion's book, the robber is not worth bothering with and not worthy of your attention. As a result you pay no attention and do not bothering with the robber at all, like the robber is invisible. The robber is angry, it's not good...

- People who're in need and asking you for help, like old people ask you to help them crossing roads, charity ask for your donation to help pitiful people, injury people ask you to call ambulance...etc, according to your religion's book, you should regard all of them as utter nothingness, all of them is not worth bothering with and not worthy of your attention... That's pretty unsympathetic.

Really it is an attitude that God (or should I say God’s work) is more important than self (what we want), and from that attitude selfless behaviors would follow. There is no actual list of behaviors, they would be different for different people.

Okay, thanks for sharing your opinion.

This is the ideal, but obviously it is not easy to attain for most people because most people find enjoyment in the material world and they are not going to sacrifice that unless they realize there is something more fulfilling.

I see, that's what you believe.

Please also provide evidence to backup your claims (the underline one) if you want to convince anyone to believe what you believe, thank you.

No, you can answer it if you have an answer.

I can try to answer the question in the manner that hypothetically "it does not matter if we believe in God before we die" and "we will all find out that God exists after we die".

Your question is:

Finally, if it does not matter if we believe in God before we die, and we will all find out that God exists after we die, why even bother to believe in God?

There is no why.

If it does not matter if we believe in God before we die, the results is that no one should be bother to believe in God.

I mean most atheists I know live very moral lives, so they do not really need the teachings and laws of religions, so why does it matter if they believe in God before they die?

Didn't you already made the claims that "it does not matter if we believe in God before we die"? Do you suddenly change your minds and believe it does matter if we believe in God before we die?

If not, why do you still asking the question that "why does it matter if atheists believe in God before they die?" ???

Or, does your question is meant to asking the theists who believe that it does matter if atheists believe in God before they die? If that is the case, then the question is not for me i guess.

No, I have not come out with the reasons yet. Do you want to know what they are?

Yes, i'm curious about that and would like know.

 

[Trailblazer]

The Buddha isn't really a prophet so much as a philosopher. And then he is only one, not three.

It is a Baha'i belief that Buddha was a Prophet, although he did also have a philosophy.

Question.—To which category do Buddha and Confucius belong?
Answer.—Buddha also established a new religion, and Confucius renewed morals and ancient virtues, but their institutions have been entirely destroyed. The beliefs and rites of the Buddhists and Confucianists have not continued in accordance with their fundamental teachings. The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God, but later the original principles of His doctrines gradually disappeared, and ignorant customs and ceremonials arose and increased until they finally ended in the worship of statues and images.
Some Answered Questions, p. 165

I don't see why you consider Taoism less of a religion than Buddhism.

The difference is that Taoism does not have a Prophet and Buddhism does.

Besides, things really begin to rock and roll when Taoism meets Buddhism. In my mind, I see the chocolate easter bunny meeting the jar of peanut butter LOL. "I've been waitin' for you, baby..."

Don't get me wrong, I think Taoism is a ood philosophy, but I do not consider it a religion because it does not have a Prophet who established it.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

To me major means it has had a significant impact upon society and religious history.

Okay, but that makes it a very subjective definition. Moreover, does said religion have to have a significant impact upon both society and religious history or will either do? And what do you mean by 'society' here? And for that matter 'religious history'?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God

Buddha didn't say anything about God at all. That's why someone can be a complete atheist and be a Buddhist.

 

[Trailblazer]

You don't live for the material world?
You don't live for your family and friends?
You don't live for your hobby?
You don't live for yourselves?

No, I do not live for the material world. I do not consider family and friends to be part of the material world as they are humans who have souls. I do not have time for hobbies but I do enjoy nature and especially my many cats. My goal is not to live for myself, but rather for God and other people.

Do you care about if you are happy or not?
Do you want to be happy?
What is happy to you?
What can makes you happy?

No, I do not care if I am happy, and I especially do not care if I have material happiness or physical pleasures, because those are only transitory. I seek only spiritual happiness because that is the only kind of happiness that is real to me, the only kind of happiness that is lasting.

We should not living for our personal happiness? What should we living for then?

I do not speak for what other people should do but rather I speak only about what I think I should do. I do not think that personal happiness is a worthwhile goal, given the scriptures of my religion admonish us to surrender self and seek and perpetual union with God,regarding our personal desires as utter nothingness aside from God’s Purpose for us.

Some christians version 1 say we should living for their denomination's God version 1.
Some christians version 2 say we should living for their God version 2.
Some christians version 3 say we should living for their God version 3...etc.
Some believers of Abrahamic religion/denomination version 300 say we should living for their religion's God version 300.
Some believers of Abrahamic religion version 301 say we should living for their God version 301.
Some believers of Abrahamic religion version 302 say we should living for their God version 302...etc.

I bet you will say we should live for your religion's version of God.

That is exactly what I said above, in so many words.

If you want to convince people to live for your version of God, you better provide evidence to prove the existence of your version of God, same to those other different kinds of believers who believe in different versions of Gods.

I can provide evidence but I cannot provide proof. Nobody can prove that God exists.

Please also provide evidence to backup your claims if you want to convince anyone to believe what you believe, thank you.

Evidence covers a lot of territory. What kind of evidence are you looking for?

I see, your religion order you to regard everything and everyone (except your God) as not worth bothering with and not worthy of your attention. I think that is a rather scary idea.

No, that is not what I meant at all although I can understand why you might have thought that. I consider All of God’s Creatures very important to bother with, especially people, but also animals. What I do not consider important are material things that are nonessential. We need a car and a place to live and we need food to eat, but we do not need all the other things most people consider so important.

For example (hypothetically):

- You're crossing a road. According to your religion's book, the cars passing by is not worthy of your attention, you should only pay attention to your God. As a result you cross the road without paying any attention of those cars. That's very dangerous.

No, that is not what I meant at all. Moreover, we cannot even pay attention to God because He is not here. What we are to pay attention to is God’s Creation.

- A robber break into your house.
Robber: Give me your money if you cares about your lives.
According to your religion's book, the robber is not worth bothering with and not worthy of your attention. As a result you pay no attention and do not bothering with the robber at all, like the robber is invisible. The robber is angry, it's not good...

No, that is not what I am suggesting. We need to take care of what we need to live on this earth, such as our homes and cars, but I do not think we should consider them more important than God or other people or animals. When I had people trying to burglarize my rental house the police were called.

- People who're in need and asking you for help, like old people ask you to help them crossing roads, charity ask for your donation to help pitiful people, injury people ask you to call ambulance...etc, according to your religion's book, you should regard all of them as utter nothingness, all of them is not worth bothering with and not worthy of your attention... That's pretty unsympathetic.

I said utter nothingness “besides God’s Purpose” but those people in need are part of God’s Purpose for us so they are not nothingness, they are really important.It is self and the worldly things we do not need to live that are like utter nothingness compared to God and everything in God’s Creation.

“This is the ideal, but obviously it is not easy to attain for most people because most people find enjoyment in the material world and they are not going to sacrifice that unless they realize there is something more fulfilling.”

I see, that's what you believe.

Please also provide evidence to backup your claims (the underline one) if you want to convince anyone to believe what you believe, thank you.

First, you would have to know what I am referring to, the “something” that is more fulfilling. The evidence that it is more fulfilling is my experience and the experiences of other people who have bene fulfilled by that something.

If it does not matter if we believe in God before we die, the results is that no one should be bother to believe in God.

But conversely, if it does matter, we should bother.

Didn't you already made the claims that "it does not matter if we believe in God before we die"? Do you suddenly change your minds and believe it does matter if we believe in God before we die?

Sorry for the confusion. I do not know if it matters, only God knows if it matters, and if so how much it matters. The scriptures of my religion indicate that it does matter, but the repercussions of not believing in God before we die are not clearly stated. So that is why I do not know if it matters or not, or how much it matters if it does matter.

“No, I have not come out with the reasons yet. Do you want to know what they are?”

Yes, i'm curious about that and would like know.

Well, it was some time ago that I said that so I do not recall what the reasons were. I think one reason I wanted to know (if it was really that important if we believe in God before we die) is because I wondered if it is really necessary for me to be talking about God to so many atheists. The other reason is because I have a lot of atheist friends I care about, so I wonder what will happen to them after they die, if they still do not believe in God.

 

[Trailblazer]

“To me major means it has had a significant impact upon society and religious history.”

Okay, but that makes it a very subjective definition. Moreover, does said religion have to have a significant impact upon both society and religious history or will either do? And what do you mean by 'society' here? And for that matter 'religious history'?

Normally, if a religion had an impact upon religious history, it would have had an impact upon society, because the two cannot be separated. At this juncture, I have some excerpts from a long passage that will hopefully help explain what I have been trying to say about the impact upon society and how it is related to religious history.

“The greatest bestowal of God in the world of humanity is religion; for assuredly the divine teachings of religion are above all other sources of instruction and development to man. Religion confers upon man eternal life and guides his footsteps in the world of morality. It opens the doors of unending happiness and bestows everlasting honor upon the human kingdom. It has been the basis of all civilization and progress in the history of mankind.......

But when we speak of religion we mean the essential foundation or reality of religion, not the dogmas and blind imitations which have gradually encrusted it and which are the cause of the decline and effacement of a nation. These are inevitably destructive and a menace and hindrance to a nation’s life,—even as it is recorded in the Torah and confirmed in history that when the Jews became fettered by empty forms and imitations the wrath of God became manifest...” Bahá’í World Faith, pp. 270, 272

If you read this chapter in its entirety you will get a broad overview of the Baha’i viewpoint on religion in general, within the context of history and its relationship to society, including its impact upon present day society.

RELIGION AND CIVILIZATION

 

[Trailblazer]

Buddha didn't say anything about God at all. That's why someone can be a complete atheist and be a Buddhist.

That is what some people say, but since we have no writings of Buddha, there is really no way to know what he said. What people said that he said many years later is not reliable.

Did The Buddha Write Anything Down?
Or did his followers write down everything he said?
No, the Buddha himself did not write anything down. The teachings were remembered and recited for many hundreds of years before anything was actually written down. Eventually, somewhere around five hundred years after the Buddha died, his teachings spoken orally for centuries were written down on palm leaves. https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question​

Certainly Buddhism as it is practiced today is completely different from the original Buddhism and probably most Buddhists are atheists.

 

[atanu]

.
So why does it matter if we believe in God? Why is it so important, or is it? This is a question I would like other Baha’is to answer, but also Christians, Muslims, Jews, or any other religious adherents...

I have reasoned that what is seen is not made out of things that are visible. It is important for me to position my ego self accordingly.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That is what some people say, but since we have no writings of Buddha, there is really no way to know what he said. What people said that he said many years later is not reliable.

Did The Buddha Write Anything Down?
Or did his followers write down everything he said?
No, the Buddha himself did not write anything down. The teachings were remembered and recited for many hundreds of years before anything was actually written down. Eventually, somewhere around five hundred years after the Buddha died, his teachings spoken orally for centuries were written down on palm leaves. https://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question​

Certainly Buddhism as it is practiced today is completely different from the original Buddhism and probably most Buddhists are atheists.

Where do you get your information that Buddha straightened out the whole Oneness of God business? Not from any oral traditions eventually written down. Is it from your Baha'i texts?

 

[RESOLUTION]

Hello my friend!!!

I'm not sure why you have things out of order. It's quite simple. There is a time where things get very bad before they come into the ultimate order (the messianic age).

I'm glad I misunderstood you. There are a few people out there who think that the Archangel Michael is the messiah, and I was afraid for a moment that you were one of them. So glad that I was wrong.

It's not that I "don't want Jesus to fulfill the prophecies." I'm not for or against any particular person. I'm simply saying that it will be beyond obvious when the Messiah comes. The entire world will recognize him. All the prophecies will be fulfilled, not just some of them. Lots of people have tried to be the messiah. I say it's great that they tried -- but ultimately they failed. They were not the messiah. They simply didn't meet the criteria. That includes Jesus.

Show me the line of David today which the Messiah will be born from.

You cannot do that so would not be able to show when a Messiah was the true Messiah by that point.

However Christ is born and is known to have been born of the line of David. There are two fine points that the Jews tend to omit and that is a child born within the union is classed as
the child of the Husband, That both Mary and Jesus were born of the line of Aaron and Moses. Because Mary like her cousin Elizabeth were born of a priestly tribe and we know Joseph
born of the line of David..

The very fact that "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation" has not happend is proof that no one in history has yet been the messiah. I wish you could see this for yourself.

Where has Gods Kingdom ever been other than with the people who are his temple?
Nations stopped lifting up swords a long long time ago.
They do not go into battle with swords.

In the meantime, all talks about the Messiah put aside...

Are you in fellowship with your fellow Jews? Do you attend a regular synagogue? I think that because you don't believe Jesus is God that your beliefs would only be considered weird but you would not be an apostate (check with Rabbi O on this, or call your local Rabbi and ask). As long as you don't go and start talking about Jesus, I should think you would be welcome with open arms. You could pray with us, celebrate with us, fast with us, repent with us, eat with us...LOL lots of eating.

Come home.

Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

The Kingdom of God has never been about food and religious rules on eating. Throughout the bible and especially the Torah it has been about a personal relationship with God.,
'For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.'
Psalm 22:16-18 This was written over a thousand years before Christ and before Romans invented Crucifixion as a means of punishment of death,

In the oldest Hebrew manuscripts the term is clearly 'pierced' before you say the definition was not correct when translated. So much is ignored and how today could the things that happened
to Jesus happen to someone else?

 

[Trailblazer]

Where do you get your information that Buddha straightened out the whole Oneness of God business? Not from any oral traditions eventually written down. Is it from your Baha'i texts?

Yes, it comes from the Baha'i texts.

Question.—To which category do Buddha and Confucius belong?
Answer.—Buddha also established a new religion, and Confucius renewed morals and ancient virtues, but their institutions have been entirely destroyed. The beliefs and rites of the Buddhists and Confucianists have not continued in accordance with their fundamental teachings. The founder of Buddhism was a wonderful soul. He established the Oneness of God, but later the original principles of His doctrines gradually disappeared, and ignorant customs and ceremonials arose and increased until they finally ended in the worship of statues and images.
Some Answered Questions, p. 165​

Note that the passage says that Buddha "established" the Oneness of God, which means that he spoke of it, but that does not mean he straightened it out. Judaism was the first monotheistic religion to champion the Oneness of God, and thus straighten out all the previous misconceptions that there were many gods.