Evidence -- making it useful

[muhammad_isa]

From what I have seen from many that study divinity is that they have only learned bad arguments and no how to fool themselves better than that average person.

Almighty God guides whomsoever He wills.
It is possible to study Divinity, and disbelieve.

We have to be sincere, and be prepared to make a lot of sacrifice, as we will not be able to find the complete truth by preferring wealth and tribal security in deciding on denomination / creed.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There is no one paragraph answer.
One has to study Divinity to a reasonable level, in order to discern between a son of God and an ordinary man.
eg. Are they pious? What are they claiming?

The Greatest Commandment of all must not be transgressed.
i.e. no hint of idol worship or ascribing partners to the Most High

The law [other commandments] should not be "cancelled" in its entirety, and replaced with something else.

Just a quickie question -- how the heck do you "study Divinity?" (To any level, not just a reasonable one.)

If I want to study dandelions, first I have to find one. Then look at it, maybe try rubbing one dandelion against another and see if they reproduce. I could taste it (yuck!). I could put it in the blender and do experiments on what's left.

But how do you study divinity? Wouldn't you need something divine that you could work on, look at, query or dissect? I mean really -- how do you study God?

I've no doubt you've got a brilliant answer that will floor me.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Just a quickie question -- how the heck do you "study Divinity?" (To any level, not just a reasonable one.)

I thought it was obvious..
Faculty of Divinity |

Many universities teach philosophy of religion and associated subjects.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Almighty God guides whomsoever He wills.
It is possible to study Divinity, and disbelieve.

We have to be sincere, and be prepared to make a lot of sacrifice, as we will not be able to find the complete truth by preferring wealth and tribal security in deciding on denomination / creed.

So now you are not only telling us that he is incompetent, now you are claiming that he is apathetic as well. Do you rally think that this helps you?

 

[DNB]

I do not expect (or hope) that this thread will reach anything like the length of the late thread titled just "Evidence." However, I think it's time that we began having some discussion, since @TransmutingSoul seems determined not to discuss how evidence might be used or evaluated in his thread. (Why do I think it won't be so long? Because I do not anticipate the evidence insisters in the other thread to participate very much. From what I've seen, they don't have much to contribute.)

A bullet casing, found lying in the street, may well be "evidence" of something, and that something may well be a crime. Then again, it could be almost anything else, too: a relic dropped by accident, a deliberately placed clue in a private game about which we know nothing because we're not playing. So that bullet casing, while it might be "evidence," is entirely useless "as evidence" unless somebody starts asking -- and answering -- questions about it.

I think, for purposes of this thread, however, we should stick to those pieces of "evidence" provided in the other thread. For reference, these are:



I'll begin with my first, most obvious thoughts:

1. How can a person, who claims to be a "Messenger from God," be identified as such by any means other than his own claim?
2. Would it not be necessary to show that "The Revelation" they give could not have been given unless it were provided by God? And can it be shown, before whatever transformation and change is intended actually occurs, that that transformation will be for the betterment of humanity?
3. Would it be necessary to show that "The Word - The Message" could not have been written or articulated by a mere human, without divine assistance? How would that be accomplished? And, like the writings of Karl Marx, sitting in the British Museum, can they be demonstrated to be certain to give the desired results? It does not appear, after all, that Marx's words did.

A bullet casing is not useless as evidence - it depends on what you're trying to prove. A murder mystery, it may be useless. Man's technology or propensity to kill, it proves a lot.

 

[DNB]

I do not expect (or hope) that this thread will reach anything like the length of the late thread titled just "Evidence." However, I think it's time that we began having some discussion, since @TransmutingSoul seems determined not to discuss how evidence might be used or evaluated in his thread. (Why do I think it won't be so long? Because I do not anticipate the evidence insisters in the other thread to participate very much. From what I've seen, they don't have much to contribute.)

A bullet casing, found lying in the street, may well be "evidence" of something, and that something may well be a crime. Then again, it could be almost anything else, too: a relic dropped by accident, a deliberately placed clue in a private game about which we know nothing because we're not playing. So that bullet casing, while it might be "evidence," is entirely useless "as evidence" unless somebody starts asking -- and answering -- questions about it.

I think, for purposes of this thread, however, we should stick to those pieces of "evidence" provided in the other thread. For reference, these are:



I'll begin with my first, most obvious thoughts:

1. How can a person, who claims to be a "Messenger from God," be identified as such by any means other than his own claim?
2. Would it not be necessary to show that "The Revelation" they give could not have been given unless it were provided by God? And can it be shown, before whatever transformation and change is intended actually occurs, that that transformation will be for the betterment of humanity?
3. Would it be necessary to show that "The Word - The Message" could not have been written or articulated by a mere human, without divine assistance? How would that be accomplished? And, like the writings of Karl Marx, sitting in the British Museum, can they be demonstrated to be certain to give the desired results? It does not appear, after all, that Marx's words did.

Many rookie detectives will walk onto a crime seen and either overlook some evidence, or misinterpret it. Evidence is only as good as the one interpreting it. Debates have raged throughout history between equal, scholarly opponents, examining the exact same evidence. It is the most perceptive that will draw the most accurate conclusion.

That's the problem here, not the lack of evidence, but the lack of depth an insight by those who fail to see what should be self-evident to all.
A man claiming to be under the auspices of God, should either be endowed with profound wisdom (comprehensible to most), or have the ability to perform the supernatural.
The existence of God carries the same burden: can the universe be explained without His intervention, or can man's reverence and exaltation of God be explained by secular means?

Enough said - evidence is only as good as the wisdom of the one interpreting it.

 

[idea]

You can use your own judgment...

Lean not unto thine own judgment?

I thought that was the main comfort of religion - don't think for yourself, don't save yourself, follow, believe, serve the male heirarchy, be a servant, be a slave or.... ye have little faith and are unbelieving

 

[idea]

...can man's reverence and exaltation of God be explained by secular means?
.

Most humans are followers, herd animals, rely on tribalism, group-think. "God" is just the queen bee, the alpha male, the 8 point buck, each herd follows their own God. It's the easiest way to avoid being responsible and self-reliant, follow the crowd.

 

[YoursTrue]

I thought it was obvious..
Faculty of Divinity |

Many universities teach philosophy of religion and associated subjects.

Yes, that is true. Many highly educated persons have come to believe in a superior power but not the same one.

 

[George-ananda]

Lean not unto thine own judgment?

I thought that was the main comfort of religion - don't think for yourself, don't save yourself, follow, believe, serve the male heirarchy, be a servant, be a slave or.... ye have little faith and are unbelieving

Well, I have a considerably better view of the intention of religion than you.

 

[DNB]

Most humans are followers, herd animals, rely on tribalism, group-think. "God" is just the queen bee, the alpha male, the 8 point buck, each herd follows their own God. It's the easiest way to avoid being responsible and self-reliant, follow the crowd.

Does that describe you?

 

[YoursTrue]

Does that describe you?

Whom are you directing this question to?

 

[Quintessence]

How can a person, who claims to be a "Messenger from God," be identified as such by any means other than his own claim?

In some ways, it's not really that complicated. Any field of study or inquiry - theological or scientific - teaches certain patterns that are then able to be recognized by those who have studied them.

As a botanist for example, you learn a bunch of darned near esoteric terms to describe plant hairs, and by practicing as a botanist you learn to recognize the difference between them. Like anything, discernment takes study and expertise that not everyone will be able to possess. That's why non-botanists will ask a botanist for help with plant identification. And someone had to do all the initial study and leg work to create the field of botany in the first place to set down the rules of what things are called and what to look for.

Theological matters work similarly. You learn the often esoteric terms to describe different aspects of experiencing the gods, and recognize them when you see them. Someone had to do all the initial study and leg work to create the theology of the tradition and what things are called and what to look for. It's part of a well-established tradition with those who are learned experts and those who are not and must ask for expert consultation.

Everything humans know starts with observations and experiences. Then someone, somewhere maybe catalogs and organizes it. Humans like organizing things, I guess; after that it only gets as complicated as you make it to be. If you know the language and the culture of a peoples, you know what's what by the recognition of the patterns established by your forebears. You know a tree is a tree because that is what you are told a tree is. You know a man is a man because that is what you were told men look like. You know a sign from gods because you were told what signs from gods looks like. It's all ingrained cultural norms of how we identify stuff and see patterns, much of which is taken so utterly for granted it is invisible to our own minds.

This probably isn't making much sense to readers. Sorry for that.

 

[DNB]

Whom are you directing this question to?

How is that a mystery?

 

[loverofhumanity]

I do not expect (or hope) that this thread will reach anything like the length of the late thread titled just "Evidence." However, I think it's time that we began having some discussion, since @TransmutingSoul seems determined not to discuss how evidence might be used or evaluated in his thread. (Why do I think it won't be so long? Because I do not anticipate the evidence insisters in the other thread to participate very much. From what I've seen, they don't have much to contribute.)

A bullet casing, found lying in the street, may well be "evidence" of something, and that something may well be a crime. Then again, it could be almost anything else, too: a relic dropped by accident, a deliberately placed clue in a private game about which we know nothing because we're not playing. So that bullet casing, while it might be "evidence," is entirely useless "as evidence" unless somebody starts asking -- and answering -- questions about it.

I think, for purposes of this thread, however, we should stick to those pieces of "evidence" provided in the other thread. For reference, these are:



I'll begin with my first, most obvious thoughts:

1. How can a person, who claims to be a "Messenger from God," be identified as such by any means other than his own claim?
2. Would it not be necessary to show that "The Revelation" they give could not have been given unless it were provided by God? And can it be shown, before whatever transformation and change is intended actually occurs, that that transformation will be for the betterment of humanity?
3. Would it be necessary to show that "The Word - The Message" could not have been written or articulated by a mere human, without divine assistance? How would that be accomplished? And, like the writings of Karl Marx, sitting in the British Museum, can they be demonstrated to be certain to give the desired results? It does not appear, after all, that Marx's words did.

I can only speak for myself. Also I think that there are many good people who aren’t religionists who the world needs to bring peace and unity such as humanists, atheists and agnostics because every human being has unique qualities and character that can enhance the collective group not just one race, nation of religion, but everyone inclusively.

I cannot say or prove my beliefs are true for anyone except myself and relate the effect they had on me and my life.

I came from a broken family and ended up orphaned. I was born into a Catholic family and had a deep love for Jesus and His teachings of love. As I grew into adolescence I drifted away from religion and became a strong atheist. But I always felt connected to humanity. Wars like Vietnam, Pol Pot genocide of millions and the disunity of religions caused me to lose hope and despair and so I decided life was not worth living if people didn’t or couldn’t get along so began the first of 6 suicide attempts, in and out of psychiatric hospitals and ending up in 6 courses of ECT to try and get me to forget about my wish for humanity to bond.

The doctors saved my physical life but that’s all. But my despair and hopelessness continued until I came across the Baha’i Faith and Baha’u’llah. When I read Baha’u’llah’s Words for the very first time I felt a great relief and healing. An inner peace I had never felt before. I was alone and I remember reading the Book of Certitude. As I read more of His Words, my despair and hopelessness were replaced with hope and certitude that humanity has a glorious future awaiting it much like a pregnant woman in pain but not dying instead a new life being born. The birth pangs of a modern world civilisation.

Confusion and doubt gradually disappeared and I became a stable person mentally and emotionally. After a few years I met a beautiful Burmese Baha’i lady and we have been married now 44 years. Anytime we had problems we would consult the Words of Baha’u’llah Who would say ‘If two people argue both are wrong’.

Because I was orphaned I did not complete my education so I never acquired a skill or profession. Yet in the Words of Baha’u’llah He stresses education so much. Then with Covid an opportunity came to study online so I am now a fully qualified Counsellor.

From my personal life by following the Words and teachings of Baha’u’llah I went from doubt, confusion and instability to joy, a stable life and marriage and acquiring a profession.

From a diagnosis of ‘Chronic Schizophrenia?’ to a fully healed mind, heart and spirit.

I thank God everyday for sending Baha’u’llah to humanity because His Words and teachings literally saved my life. I do not doubt that this power to transform lives exists with all the other Manifestations of God such as Moses, Christ and Muhammad.

If we are humble and put our minds in ‘learning mode’ then there is so much wisdom we can learn from These Great Spiritual Beings. I did and I found by listening to Their counsel, my life went from misery to inner peace and stability.

For me, I found that for my life, by following Baha’u’llah’s Counsels I benefited immensely. His Words had a very powerful healing effect that transformed me completely. I accept that the power within His Words come from an unseen realm. A power born of God and that He is a Manifestation of God. I am in need of no further proof than this.

 

[RestlessSoul]

The preface to this thread, by the way, should have been a quote from George Carlin:

“Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure.”​

Why start a discussion with an open mind, when a condescending attitude can set the tone so much better, eh?

 

[Mock Turtle]

The existence of God carries the same burden: can the universe be explained without His intervention,

Given that hopefully we might live long enough, as a species, have you given humans enough time to come up with a satisfactory explanation, or are you simply happy to go with the one preferred?

or can man's reverence and exaltation of God be explained by secular means?

It seems they can, given the spectrum of such beliefs (often contradictory) and the fact that many can do without these.

 

[Brian2]

How? What does fulfilled prophecy have to do with the existence of a God?

I'm not sure it has anything to do with one. Even if someone made hundreds of thousands of extremely precise and accurate predictions, far beyond what they should be capable of through normal means, are there not countless other possible explanations for this? Many of which that posit fewer assumptions than the existence of God?

For instance, what if they could just see the future? No God necessary.

Yes someone could just be able to see the future, no God necessary.
And if many people over a period of a couple of thousand years all made prophecies which came true, and credited God with giving them those prophecies, would it be easier to just say that they could all tell the future instead of seeing a God behind it?
What are some of the countless possible explanations other than a God and why do you think that fewer assumptions would be involved in axing God than others of the countless possible explanations?
And why do the number of assumptions have anything to do with anything anyway?

 

[1213]

..."Messenger from God," be identified as such by any means other than his own claim?...

In Bible is goes like this:

The same came to him by night, and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.”
John 3:2

If I don’t do the works of my Father, don’t believe me. But if I do them, though you don’t believe me, believe the works; that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
John 10:37-38

Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
John 14:10-11

If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:17

 

[Brian2]

Got any? (Of course, I mean unambiguous fulfilled prophecies, and prophecies that were made before they were fulfilled -- so rule out Daniel.)One example, of course, might be Jesus's prophecy that he'd return while some around Him were still living. I have to presume, if that's to be fulfilled, that there at least a person or two who have been waiting around for 2 millenia.

I can see that you have been poisoned against fulfilled Biblical prophecies.
How about miracles and rising from the dead? They could help identify someone from God,,,,,,,,,,,,,, especially if the miracles and rising from the dead were prophesied about.