Does it really matter what people believe?

[Audie]

Some of us who are religious are also puzzled by the process of choosing what to believe and then believing it.

But you do it anyway?

 

[Trailblazer]

But you do it anyway?

I don't always believe it, only when I choose to.

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: ↑
then they say **** like like "God is sending you tests for your own benefit", or "suffering is to make us stronger"
... is horrible, I noticed that, too.

You said: Some people use it as a finisher for debate, it seems to me.

No, I think they do it because they really believe it, and they do not give a damn how much those words hurt other people, because their beliefs matter to them MORE than anything else.

With some notable exceptions, I am sorry to say that atheists have far more compassion than believers, probably because they are not mired in beliefs.

 

[Windwalker]

I merely refuted your claim that those who made good experiences in their lives had a better knowledge about scripture than those who don't.

I don't believe I used the word "better". I was merely pointing out that our life experiences will shape how we read scripture. I see unconditional love much more easily, because I recognize what that looks like in personal experience growing up with my parents. But beyond just that, I actually have experiences of the Divine, and the sorts of "cast you into hell" stuff, is completely outside and foreign to my experiences. I think that does give a certain 'advantage', having actually been to the destination, rather than looking at it on a map.

Of course though, it is completely understandable that those who grew up not seeing unconditional love with someone in their lives, will have a hard time understanding what that looks like. I found it very strange to me when I first probed into that, to hear people honestly, and sincerely not getting the whole idea of unconditional love. If they've never experienced that, they can't understand what that is. It's not within their experiences. And I have found that to them, God's love is conditional. They spoke of their parent's love and acceptance of them, as conditional upon them being good people, or something to that affect.

To me, their experience of conditionally loving parents, is utterly foreign to me, just as my experience with my parents is utterly foreign to them. As I said, such experiences are like the color of the glasses you are putting on when you read scripture. Everything, is colorized by those experiences. The God of unconditional Love who is constantly forgiving you and waiting for you to wake up, or the God of conditional love you have be careful not to get on his bad side lest you end up in hell. These are very contrasting visions of God, and they typically come back to our childhood.

an answer would take it to the personal level. This thread is not about Thomas T as you may have noticed

You don't have to answer anything personal, but it would be interesting to see if it is consistent with what I have observed, which I've mentioned above. If nothing else, what I'm saying is food for thought.

 

[Trailblazer]

@ Nimos

In an awful turn of events yesterday I was knocked off my horse again but I will definitely be back to answer your post on this thread as soon as I regain some composure.

 

[thomas t]

With some notable exceptions, I am sorry to say that atheists have far more compassion than believers, probably because they are not mired in beliefs.

I suppose they are more or less the same when it comes to compassion.
In my opinion, it's like this: in Christian churches much is going on.
On the one hand, you have churches that care for the refugees, have great missionary projects, help children from poor families and so on.
On the other, there the churches that don't have any of this but try to get rid of people in trouble instead. Which is contrary to what Bible teaches, unfortunately.
If you happened to meet people from the second group of churches it's understandable that you talk like this, I think. Unfortunately.

 

[thomas t]

Of course though, it is completely understandable that those who grew up not seeing unconditional love with someone in their lives, will have a hard time understanding what that looks like.

whether this is an advantage or not may be subject to speculation.

As I said, "unconditional love" is a terminology that cannot be found in the Bible. It is speculation to say that God has unconditional love for everyone, here I stay with my opinion.

But if it's not there in the Bible, the whole concept of "unconditional love" is not important for scripture anyway. If it would have been of importance, Jesus would have let people know about it! It may be a nice concept but remain just that: nice. Not every nice thing is found in the Bible.

As a matter of fact, those who had a bad childhood don't suffer from a limited understanding any more than those who had a good childhood, Romans 2:11. God is no respecter of persons, I think, he shares out understanding of His scriptures in a way that nobody gets discriminated against.

The God of unconditional Love who is constantly forgiving you

well, as I said, this depends on how you interact with God, I think.
Mark 1:4 gives an example of that.

 

[Windwalker]

whether this is an advantage or not may be subject to speculation.

You sure love to use words like speculation, theory, and opinion to downplay the views of others. Again, that applies more to the person without experience than it does to the one with experience. A person who has traveled to the mountains, breathed its air, stood upon its slopes, taken in its beauty, is not speculating about the reality of mountains. But the person who has only read about them, studied them on maps, and making proclamations of truth about them from that vantage point, is decidedly less informed than the person who has been to or lives in the mountains.

As I said, "unconditional love" is a terminology that cannot be found in the Bible. It is speculation to say that God has unconditional love for everyone, here I stay with my opinion.

Again with your unfounded dismissive language. You can say that all you want, but it applies much more to the person who only theories about the Divine, versus the person who has drunk from the Divine. In reality here, the one speculating is you. The fact that you keep falling back to that hackneyed response, indicates a lack of substantive response. It betrays the weakness of your position.

"God is Love". That's an absolute statement. "God is Light". That's an absolute statement. "God is Spirit", that's an absolute statement. There are no conditions being set in those absolute statements. You are superimposing them on those. It does not say, "God is Love, if you please him".

But if it's not there in the Bible, the whole concept of "unconditional love" is not important for scripture anyway.

It is in scripture. The words we use to describe what we see in scripture, do not need to be stated in those words in scripture, in order for them to be valid. If for instance, you believe in the Trinity, that word doesn't exist in scripture, but to many who read scripture, they see that is what is being taught. In fact, the word Bible, is not in the Bible, yet you proclaim it as the absolute authority supporting your opinions.

If it would have been of importance, Jesus would have let people know about it! It may be a nice concept but remain just that: nice.

It is taught in scripture, and Jesus primarily taught this. I have given examples of this. That you can't see it, is likely due to the colorized lenses you are looking at it though, blocking its wavelength from reaching your eyes. To me, you're clearly not looking at it through the lense of absolute Love, which is the being of God, according to scripture - and personal firsthand experience.

I had a thought enter my mind last night. "Biblical, is in the eye of the beholder". Just like beauty is.

Not every nice thing is found in the Bible.

Be careful here. You're making an argument that will support my views. There is a lot of Truth about the Divine, that is far more expansive and open and expressive, than only that which is in the Bible. We find God with the heart, with the soul, in lived experience, not with the intellect and opinions about scripture.

Making it only about what you interpret from scripture, pushes the living Presence of the Divine into a corner. It makes it a projection of your own ego and insecurities. IMO, doing that is a form of avoiding God.

As a matter of fact, those who had a bad childhood don't suffer from a limited understanding any more than those who had a good childhood, Romans 2:11. God is no respecter of persons, I think, he shares out understanding of His scriptures in a way that nobody gets discriminated against.

Well, sure, from God's perspective, we're all mistaken and are loved by him, even if we aren't "right" about what we are interpreting from scripture. That supports what I have been saying all along. We are all forgiven, and that "by their fruits you shall know them," those who follow that Light, even in they are mistaken in their ideas about God. Same for you. Same for me. Jesus did not, once ever teach, "By their correct beliefs you shall know them".

well, as I said, this depends on how you interact with God, I think.
Mark 1:4 gives an example of that.

I have no issues with that verse, in fact repentance is a prerequisite to being open to God. Stubbornness in views and beliefs and opinions, are a sure block to the Divine. All that comes from the ego.

 

[Trailblazer]

I suppose they are more or less the same when it comes to compassion.
In my opinion, it's like this: in Christian churches much is going on.
On the one hand, you have churches that care for the refugees, have great missionary projects, help children from poor families and so on.
On the other, there the churches that don't have any of this but try to get rid of people in trouble instead. Which is contrary to what Bible teaches, unfortunately.
If you happened to meet people from the second group of churches it's understandable that you talk like this, I think. Unfortunately.

I know it is not good to generalize about any group of people, but sadly this has been my experience.

 

[thomas t]

I disagree that Bible interpretation is a 100% subjective endeavor.

It is taught in scripture, and Jesus primarily taught this. I have given examples of this.

Actually, you couldn't provide examples of "unconditional love" in the Bible.
You made the claim that you did in #97 already, but I already wrote in # 109: your verses did not show that God's forgiveness is unconditional. Neither the Prodigal Son nor "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. [...]" nor "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" as put in its right context.... mirrors unconditional forgiveness, as shown in my previous responses.
These were the only 3 scripture verses you cited to bolster your stance of unconditional forgiveness.

... so this is going round in circles now.

Even if God is love, that doesn't mean He shows His love to everyone in an unconditional manner.

I don't resort to superimposing conditions for God sharing His love, I think. I cite scripture. That's all.

We find God with the heart, with the soul, in lived experience, not with the intellect and opinions about scripture.

Making it only about what you interpret from scripture, pushes the living Presence of the Divine into a corner. It makes it a projection of your own ego and insecurities. IMO, doing that is a form of avoiding God.

I don't resort to projection here in simply pointing out that Bible alone is the standard for the rules in Christianity.
Anyway, referring to scripture alone never avoids God. Scripture comes from God. The rules are laid out in scripture.

There is a lot of Truth about the Divine, that is far more expansive and open and expressive, than only that which is in the Bible.

I stay with my opinion: if a concept is spiritually important, Jesus would have claimed so in His Bible, of course.

Jesus did not, once ever teach, "By their correct beliefs you shall know them".

I didn't claim otherwise.

Well, sure, from God's perspective, we're all mistaken and are loved by him, even if we aren't "right" about what we are interpreting from scripture.

I didn't claim so.
---
I don't like the word speculation, I use it. I don't love to downplay the opinions of others.

I don't think I was speculating. I don't think my position is weak here. I think my response was substantive enough.
Even if you claim to "have drunk from the Divine" having "first hand experience" with God.... I doubt that your Bible understanding is in any way superior to or more advanced than mine is.

I don't block scripture truth from reaching my eyes.

 

[Trailblazer]

Even if God is love, that doesn't mean He shows His love to everyone in an unconditional manner.

I fully agree. Even if God loves everyone, why should God show His love in an unconditional manner?
Where is the evidence in scripture that God does so?

 

[Windwalker]

I disagree that Bible interpretation is a 100% subjective endeavor.

Do you believe that is what I have said? I don't believe that either. However, to claim, "I read it right there on the pages, it's right there, and it means this", is not 100% objective or factual either. Will you agree with this?

Actually, you couldn't provide examples of "unconditional love" in the Bible.

I have already. "God is Love". That has no conditions set upon it. It is the nature of the Divine itself, as Love, Absolute, and Infinite. To say that has conditions, denies what John wrote. I agree with what he wrote, BTW.

There are others of course, but I rue going down the path of tit for tat debating the meanings of different verses. I've long ago learned that is utterly unproductive. I know for myself however, my experience has been, that I used to read certain verses a certain way, but with greater context through spiritual experience, those same verses become understood in a very different light. That's kind of common sense. But if someone lacks that context, then, like me in my earlier years, they probably won't see it either. Context really is everything, and not just context of a passage, but the context of spiritual experience, what we bring into reading the texts.

You made the claim that you did in #97 already, but I already wrote in # 109: your verses did not show that God's forgiveness is unconditional. Neither the Prodigal Son nor "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. [...]" nor "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do" as put in its right context.... mirrors unconditional forgiveness, as shown in my previous responses.
These were the only 3 scripture verses you cited to bolster your stance of unconditional forgiveness.

... so this is going round in circles now.

Which goes to show, without a similar context, you can't see the same things. I said before, completely setting God and the Bible aside, just talking about parents who are unconditionally loving to someone who grew up where love was a conditional affair, they will likely see unconditional love as a fantasy, a non-reality, and try to tell the person who experienced that that they are delusional, in order to disregard what the other person is saying. Such as you saying what I say, is my "theory, speculation, assumptions, opinion," and such.

Even if God is love, that doesn't mean He shows His love to everyone in an unconditional manner.

Please let me focus a little more on this, because I don't think you picked up on what I have been saying. God's Love, is absolutely Pure and unconditioned. That Love is shown to the whole world, every single second of every single day, and all moments in between. However, our inabilities to allow that to come into our personal lives is a matter of our willingness to accept it. It is not withheld by God, it is denied by us. God does not parcel out more love here and less love there, like may have been the experience of some human children with their human parents.

I quoted scripture to support that as well in the "love your enemies" passage. Jesus is teaching that we should love our enemies, because God is not partial or a respecter of persons, like the conditional love of humans may be. There is a passage right there to support what I have been saying. If you are correct about it being conditional, then Jesus would have said, "Don't love your enemies, because God doesn't either."

I don't resort to superimposing conditions for God sharing His love, I think. I cite scripture. That's all.

Do we need to do something to get God to love us? Does God love us more when we're good, and less when we're bad? I'd like your opinion on this.

I don't resort to projection here in simply pointing out that Bible alone is the standard for the rules in Christianity.

Nowhere is that taught in scripture. That was a much later understanding of the role of scripture in the Protest revolution that arose in the 1600s. Nowhere does it teach in scripture that the only way to know God, is by reading the Bible.

Anyway, referring to scripture alone never avoids God. Scripture comes from God. The rules are laid out in scripture.

The rules as you are interpreting through the filters through which you read it. Those are not absolute. And when we insist that our understanding of scripture is absolute, which you sure seem like you are doing, that most definitely is avoiding God. It place ego before God, hiding it behind absolutist language about scripture.

I stay with my opinion: if a concept is spiritually important, Jesus would have claimed so in His Bible, of course.

"Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." That absolutely leaves room beyond just what is in the Bible. As I said, to limit it to only those texts, is absolutely to limit God. It avoids God, actually, hiding behind absolutist opinions.

Even if you claim to "have drunk from the Divine" having "first hand experience" with God.... I doubt that your Bible understanding is in any way superior to or more advanced than mine is.

I don't claim my understanding of scripture is "Right", in some absolutist sense. But I will say this, it has changed and deepened over the years, as personal experience has illuminated it. Spiritual maturation, does have a way in changing how we think about what scripture teaches.

I don't block scripture truth from reaching my eyes.

Of course you do. We all have that problem, which is why we need to seek spiritual illumination, not just better academics. We need to set aside our assumptions, and allow Spirit to illuminate our minds and our understandings of scripture, and life, and the world.

 

[Trailblazer]

God's Love, is absolutely Pure and unconditioned. That Love is shown to the whole world, every single second of every single day, and all moments in between.

I guess that is why there is so much suffering in the world. Maybe watching people suffer is how God shows His love.

But of course it is easy to say God is love if you are not the one suffering.
And of course it is easy to blame the people who are suffering because they don't feel God's love.

 

[Windwalker]

I guess that is why there is so much suffering in the world. Maybe watching people suffer is how God shows His love.

Of course not. The sun shines on every village, but those that hide indoors and never venture out get to see it. It's up to us to make the world better, by "listening" to God in our hearts. We participate in this world. We're not merely inhabitants ruled from afar by an absentee landlord.

But of course it is easy to say God is love if you are not the one suffering.
And of course it is easy to blame the people who are suffering because they don't feel God's love.

God is love even in our suffering, even when we can't see it, or avail ourselves of it. I think it's helpful to not think of God as something that will fix things for you, but rather empower you to bring forth the Divine into the world to make if a better, less awful experience for everyone alive. I believe in a participatory kingdom, not one where God does it for you, and smashes with force those who don't conform. That's not love, in my understanding of the word.

Maybe think of it like oxygen. If you aren't able to breathe it, your body will suffer and you become ill and eventually die. You suffocate without God, more or less.

 

[Trailblazer]

Of course not. The sun shines on every village, but those that hide indoors and never venture out get to see it. It's up to us to make the world better, by "listening" to God in our hearts. We participate in this world. We're not merely inhabitants ruled from afar by an absentee landlord.

God is love even in our suffering, even when we can't see it, or avail ourselves of it. I think it's helpful to not think of God as something that will fix things for you, but rather empower you to bring forth the Divine into the world to make if a better, less awful experience for everyone alive. I believe in a participatory kingdom, not one where God does it for you, and smashes with force those who don't conform. That's not love, in my understanding of the word.

Maybe think of it like oxygen. If you aren't able to breathe it, your body will suffer and you become ill and eventually die. You suffocate without God, more or less.

Those are your beliefs about God, they are not facts because you cannot prove them. You are welcome to have your beliefs just as we all are. I do not share those beliefs because I am a separate person with a different experience and I have a different way of processing what I see in the world.

Even if God is love, that does not mean God is nothing else. That is illogical. Imo people want to believe it God is love so they will feel loved but I only want to believe what is actually true, not a fantasy.

Baha'is would agree with you that God is love in spite of the suffering in the world, but I am different from most Baha'is.

 

[thomas t]

The rules as you are interpreting through the filters through which you read it. Those are not absolute.

I think Bible is as objective as it can be. Everyone reads it a bit different, but in its core it's solid.

I have already. "God is Love".

I don't say that God has conditions. Also, God lets his sun shine equally on everyone.
But - as I said - this doesn't mean that God shares out his love (forgiveness) unconditionally.

I stay with my opinion - there is no scripture to support your stance.
You often say you have experience. This shouldn't be a reason to circumvent scripture, as I see it.
You also suggest that since you have this experience... your understanding is superior to or more advanced than mine. I doubt it, as I said in my last post.

Pointing out speculation for what it is... is ok in discussion, I think. I does not reveal a bad background.

I said before, completely setting God and the Bible aside, just talking about parents who are unconditionally loving to someone who grew up where love was a conditional affair, they will likely see unconditional love as a fantasy, a non-reality, and try to tell the person who experienced that that they are delusional, in order to disregard what the other person is saying.

I answered this already.
I wrote:
Bible does not say that even those who enjoyed a very good upbringing with loving parents have an advantage over those who didn't when it comes to Bible understanding.
There is no reason to believe that the former are better off when it comes to interpreting scripture.
and
As a matter of fact, those who had a bad childhood don't suffer from a limited understanding any more than those who had a good childhood, Romans 2:11. God is no respecter of persons, I think, he shares out understanding of His scriptures in a way that nobody gets discriminated against.
#127
----
Loving one's enemies does not imply unconditional love, I think. You can love your enemies and put up conditions. Noone has to be a doormat for enemies, as I see it.

Maybe we don't need to do something in order to get God's love. Maybe God loves us the same regardless of actions. I'm neutral on this.
But still I maintain, unconditional love in a sense of unconditionally shared out love... is not a concept found in the Bible.
Even if people don't really need to do anything to get God's love - which I want to leave open here - they need to adopt a stance, in my opinion, see Mark 1:4. A stance is not a work, though.

Nowhere does it teach in scripture that the only way to know God, is by reading the Bible.

this wasn't what I said. I acknowledge that there can be dreams and visions.
I believe that when important rules are given... they are given in scripture. I stay with my opinion that important spiritual truths can be found in the Bible. Even if Jesus did more works than those mentioned in it.
---
I don't insist that my understanding of scripture is absolute. I don't "place ego before God, hiding it behind absolutist language about scripture" as you say.
I don't think my stance with reagrd to where important rules can be found... is equal to limiting God or avoiding God or hiding behind absolutist opinions. God can cope with His Bible.

Even if you claim illumination or maturation... I continue to doubt that your Bible understanding is in any way superior to or more advanced than mine is.

I stay with my opinion: I don't block Bible truth to reach my eyes.

edited to add blue part

 

[Windwalker]

Those are your beliefs about God, they are not facts because you cannot prove them.

Are you trying to reduce God to a provable equation of science? To be clear, these are my experiences of God, and my beliefs surrounding those experiences are flexible, but never denying of the core truth of the experience. God is love, is not open to God is hate, because nothing in my experience would support that belief.

I'm a little surprised by your response here.

Even if God is love, that does not mean God is nothing else. That is illogical.

But it does mean that God is not hate. God is not darkness, and God is not death. Of course God is not just that one thing. I've never suggested that. But God is Love, means, God is Love, not hate.

Baha'is would agree with you that God is love in spite of the suffering in the world, but I am different from most Baha'is.

So my friendly suggestion to you to maybe try thinking less of God as potentate who pulls all the strings, and should be blamed for the suffering in the world, to thinking of God more in terms of a Wellspring of Life that we can draw from to improve our spiritual and social health, fell completely flat for you for some reason? May I ask why? In your mind, God should fix it for you?

 

[Trailblazer]

Are you trying to reduce God to a provable equation of science? To be clear, these are my experiences of God, and my beliefs surrounding those experiences are flexible, but never denying of the core truth of the experience. God is love, is not open to God is hate, because nothing in my experience would support that belief.

I was not referring to proving God exists, I was referring to attaching attributes to God, as if we can know what God is like. I dislike it when Baha'is do that too. Why can't we just accept that God is God and God is unknowable? Why do we have to say God is loving, merciful and just? I think people do that because they want to believe it. I know you have had your personal experiences and that is your own business, and proof only to you.

I would not say that God is hate because that runs contrary to what Baha'u'llah wrote about God creating us out of love.

3: O SON OF MAN! Veiled in My immemorial being and in the ancient eternity of My essence, I knew My love for thee; therefore I created thee, have engraved on thee Mine image and revealed to thee My beauty.
The Hidden Words of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 4

i just don't know what happened after that. .

I'm a little surprised by your response here.

I do not know why. I have always struggled with God being "All-Loving." I have made a lot of progress lately in that I do not hate God anymore, but I would not say I love Him either. I have no reason to love God other than it says I am supposed to in scriptures.

But it does mean that God is not hate. God is not darkness, and God is not death. Of course God is not just that one thing. I've never suggested that. But God is Love, means, God is Love, not hate.

Okay, I am glad we got that straightened out.

So my friendly suggestion to you to maybe try thinking less of God as potentate who pulls all the strings, and should be blamed for the suffering in the world, to thinking of God more in terms of a Wellspring of Life that we can draw from to improve our spiritual and social health, fell completely flat for you for some reason? May I ask why? In your mind, God should fix it for you?

I do not blame God for causing suffering but God created a world in which He knew that humans and animals would suffer and die, and all suffering cannot be ameliorated. God is the Creator and that is why I hold God responsible. No, I do not expect God to fix anything for me, there is no fix. Life just is and it is much more difficult for some people than for others, usually through no fault of their own. What I see is inequity. As a Baha'i I believe the social and economic inequity will eventually be eliminated but that is not what I am referring to. I am referring to what we are born with and what happens after that which is outside of our control.

My husband and I have this "God discussion" often and he has no answers, so he ends up saying that there are mysteries in life and we will know the answers after we die and go to the spiritual world, as if that answer solves the problem, but it does not solve anything for me.

 

[Trailblazer]

No that is was not what I meant with what I wrote, it's not about taking sides. Simply that people change their view based on what they believe to be true and that these views are not compatible. A muslim is not going to accept Baha'u'llah, simply because that is not what they believe. So their views on this will be vastly different than yours due to that fact.

You are correct because it is true that people do not generally change their religious beliefs, and that is the primary reason there are not more Baha’is, since 84 percent of the world population has a faith and only about .12% of the world population are Baha’is.

You are also correct in saying that people “believe” these religious view are true, but does that mean they are true? Maybe they are true to a certain extent, but are they the only true religion, as those believers believe?

For me personally, I don't care who is who or which believe what. I care about evidence and proves and so far none of them have done any better than the others in my opinion.

I do not know what you expect to have as evidence. Maybe you are looking for a kind of evidence that simply does not exist.

Following from the last, and I completely agree with you on this, except I take it one step further, meaning I can't believe in a God just because it is written in scriptures.

But what other evidence of God would you expect to have? If a message from God did not come to you in written form, how would you get it?

But since you do believe in one, and so many other people believe in a different version of this God, which do not forgive these things according to their scriptures, it simply becomes a matter of who is right, assuming that God exist in the first place? If their version is correct, you have little to no hope of forgiveness, but if you are right, you probably won't have any issues.

That is correct, it does all boil down to which religion is right, but the Baha’i Faith is the only religion that can be right and still accommodate the fact that all religions are true, even though their messages and social teachings and laws are outdated.

The atheists view is to simply say, that what if you are wrong about a God all together, which would mean that you are wasting your only life seeking something that doesn't exist and letting that control your life?

I suppose that is a possibility that there is no God, because nobody can prove God exists like a fact, but what are the chances that 93% of the people in the world who believe in God are all wrong and only the 7% of atheists are right? I am not saying that just because many people believe in God, God must exist, because that would be committing the fallacy of argumentum ad populum, but when it comes to something as important as God, I think it is wise to ask why so many people would believe in a God that does not exist. Moreover, since God is related to the purpose of our existence, it is very important to know of God exists and what God’s will is for us. This is simply logical.

And don't get me wrong, all atheists would probably agree, that if we are wrong there is probably not a bright future waiting us.

And that does not worry you that you could be wrong about something as important as God? You still have time to think about it because it is not over till the curtain call comes, but you might be missing out in valuable opportunity to know about God and what God’s will is for you, which will be what will make a huge difference when you enter the spiritual realm. And there are no guarantees that you will be able to acquire what you could have acquired in this life after you die, because you won’t have free will as you do here.

Yes, but ultimately, since they hold the bible true, It is about salvation from this life into the next one. Whether or not Jesus is with them to guide them on this trip or not, doesn't really change that. If you think about it, assuming you are a Christian and you live a good and decent life, when you then finally die you end up no better off, than an atheist or one of wrong faith. Then the bible is rather pointless and could be reduced to a single line "Be a good person and you will be saved by God" I think most people even Christians would feel slightly mislead to be honest, taking in account the amount of suffering religion have caused people throughout history.

So ultimately the end goal is to be saved and be better off than those that chose wrong.

Maybe that is the end goal for Christians, but that is not then end goal for Baha’is. In fact, we are not even supposed to do what we do to get saved.

“WORSHIP thou God in such wise that if thy worship lead thee to the fire, no alteration in thine adoration would be produced, and so likewise if thy recompense should be paradise.... Fire and paradise both bow down and prostrate themselves before God. That which is worthy of His Essence is to worship Him for His sake, without fear of fire, or hope of paradise.

Although when true worship is offered, the worshipper is delivered from the fire, and entereth the paradise of God’s good-pleasure, yet such should not be the motive of his act. However, God’s favour and grace ever flow in accordance with the exigencies of His inscrutable wisdom.” Selections From the Writings of the Báb, pp. 77-78

The Bab wrote that we are supposed to worship God for His sake, not to get to heaven, but that is kind of misleading because it is really for our sake that we worship God since God does not need anything from us, because God has no needs. So then we have to ask why it is good for us to worship God, and when you find the answer Nimos, please let me know!

Well, obviously I do not share Christian beliefs about how great God is, and how we should worship God 24/7, and I am also on the outs with Baha’is since they also believe God is worthy of worship. Sorry Nimos, but I am a logical person so I need to know why God is worthy, I can’t believe that just because it is in scriptures. That God created me is not a good enough reason because I do not even want to exist. So why is God worthy of worship? I posted a thread with this question on this a while back.

Okay, so God sent Messengers to guide us to the straight path, that is one thing God does, but how hard is that for an Omnipotent God? It is the Messengers who suffer and sacrifice their lives for our benefit, so they are the ones who deserve the credit, but we are not supposed to worship them, we are supposed to worship God…. But why should we?

Christians say God gave His only son, give me a break because God has no son since God is not a human being. What really happened is that Jesus chose to sacrifice Himself for the sake of humanity, so why does God get the credit?

Other than sending Messengers I am not going to believe like Christians that God is “doing” anything else, because there is no evidence of God doing anything, so I consider that a fantasy belief.

(Continued on next post)

 

[Trailblazer]

I think that is one of the flaws about religions and what they teach people. Does enjoying this life make you are worse Bahai? I don't mean you should ruin the lives of others in achieving this, but I fail to see how this is connected? Because following that logic, if you gave away all your money and went to live on the street in a cardbox, then you would be a perfect Bahai or what?

Please do not use me as a representative example of a Baha’i and what they do because I tend towards austerity by choice, since I take what Baha’u’llah wrote about not being attached to the world very seriously. Maybe that’s good, or maybe not, but that is just the way I am. Here is what Baha’u’llah said about the world, one passage of many.

“The world is but a show, vain and empty, a mere nothing, bearing the semblance of reality. Set not your affections upon it. Break not the bond that uniteth you with your Creator, and be not of those that have erred and strayed from His ways. Verily I say, the world is like the vapor in a desert, which the thirsty dreameth to be water and striveth after it with all his might, until when he cometh unto it, he findeth it to be mere illusion. It may, moreover, be likened unto the lifeless image of the beloved whom the lover hath sought and found, in the end, after long search and to his utmost regret, to be such as cannot “fatten nor appease his hunger.”Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 328-329

Maybe I take that too literally, but He should not have written it if he did not intend for us to take it seriously.

But then we also have passages like the one below. Baha’u’llah is telling us to enjoy the good things in the world bit then He says that whatsoever deters is from loving God is nothing but the world. Do you see the contradiction? The other Baha’is don’t like it when I point this out because of course most people like to enjoy themselves.

“Know ye that by “the world” is meant your unawareness of Him Who is your Maker, and your absorption in aught else but Him. The “life to come,” on the other hand, signifieth the things that give you a safe approach to God, the All-Glorious, the Incomparable. Whatsoever deterreth you, in this Day, from loving God is nothing but the world. Flee it, that ye may be numbered with the blest. Should a man wish to adorn himself with the ornaments of the earth, to wear its apparels, or partake of the benefits it can bestow, no harm can befall him, if he alloweth nothing whatever to intervene between him and God, for God hath ordained every good thing, whether created in the heavens or in the earth, for such of His servants as truly believe in Him. Eat ye, O people, of the good things which God hath allowed you, and deprive not yourselves from His wondrous bounties. Render thanks and praise unto Him, and be of them that are truly thankful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 276

I can understand these saying from a general point of view or as an overall idea. But they really don't make a whole lot of sense. The first one we can ignore, if you don't believe in God then you don't believe in him.

The first commandment: “Our God, The Lord is One; Thou shalt love thy Lord, thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.” Obviously you cannot do that if you do not believe that God exists, but I believe God exists and I cannot do it either, just because it is written on the pages of a book. I have to know why I am doing something in order to do it, there has to be a reason that makes sense.

The second one to "love thy neighbour...", is just not a reflection of reality as much as it is just a nice saying. Because not even Christians live by it, take the amount of priests that have been busted for exploiting kids or whatever people do and then call themself religious and true believers. And to fix or excuse it, we get the bull**** that we are all born sinners. It's just one excuse after another, rather than accepting that these issues exist in the world and then we figure out, how do we best solve them.

Well, since I do not believe we are born as sinners I do not consider that an excuse for any of our behaviors. I do believe we have the propensity to sin because we have a lower animal nature, but we also have a higher spiritual nature so we can choose to follow that nature, since we have free will.

To me most religions is about throwing away responsibility or not wanting to look at the "bad" things. We don't solve these issues by praying or reminding people that they need to be better. It hasn't worked for the last 1000s of years, it should be enough evidence that it is never going to work. Just want to point out that luckily a majority of religious people can figure out that more is needed. But still this is basically what religious nonsense keep reminding people that the solution is.

You are preaching to the choir, Nimos. I fully agree that being praying and believing that is going to change anything so that is not the answer. People need to change themselves and thereby change the world, but in order to do that they need to look at their faults and correct them. We also need to have solutions to the world’s spiritual, social and economic problems, and that is where the Writings of Baha’u’llah come in. He revealed what we need to change ourselves and the world and we have to figure out how to apply these teachings.

Yes but in the end all that matters is who is right?

If you are wrong, and Christians that believe in hell is right you are going there to. I think it's great that the Bahai doesn't teach people about hell at least, because I would assume that people truly believing in this must be scared almost constantly.

Get real. Christians cannot be right if God is just and good, and if God is not just and good why would anyone even want to believe in God? I say they cannot be right because NO just God who is good would exclude 71% of the human population from heaven, paradise, or whatever you want to call it, including the 24% of people who are Muslims and the 15% of people who are Hindus. But it is not only the Christians who believe they are the only true religion, all the religious believers believe that except the Baha’is, who believe that all religions are true and they are all one religion which is continually unfolding throughout the ages.

Religions are all one in the sense that they all originate from the One God. The only reason religions differ is because the needs of humanity change in different ages; so God reveals a new message that addresses the needs of the times and new social teachings and laws..

“These principles and laws, these firmly-established and mighty systems, have proceeded from one Source, and are the rays of one Light. That they differ one from another is to be attributed to the varying requirements of the ages in which they were promulgated.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 287-288

The Baha’i Faith is simply the latest is a series of great religions and more religions will be revealed in the future.

“The world’s equilibrium hath been upset through the vibrating influence of this most great, this new World Order. Mankind’s ordered life hath been revolutionized through the agency of this unique, this wondrous System—the like of which mortal eyes have never witnessed…….

This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 136

This is called Progressive Revelation and it is such a simple concept. I just don’t understand why more people cannot grasp it but I think the reason is that they are so convinced that their religion is the only true one.