Evidence

[TransmutingSoul]

Then why post it in a debate forum. It's just a disingenuous excuse to proselytise if you're not willing to debate .

Maybe it is possible that some will see that evidence is evidence, albeit not what they would want to see as evidence for God.

There are many types of evidence and it is offered in this OP, that the evidence God gives humanity is, 1) The Person, 2 the Revelation and 3 the Message.

So the debate would not be about if it is evidence, but what does that evidence show us.

Regards Tony

 

[Colt]

That has naught to do with the OP.

That could apply to ones own stance. Truth is relative to our capacity to apply reason based justice.

Regards Tony

Faith is a gift not an intellectual accomplishment.

 

[F1fan]

Validated 100% that they were recorded from Baha'u'llah. Trustworthy evidence.

Irrelevant. It doesn't matter that this guy wrote every word. The issue is whether what he wrote is true. You have no evidence that the fantastic claims are true. He claims to be a messenger, but where is the credible evidence that he actually was?

The factual aspect of these wrirings tie back to determining if they are indeed from an Infallible Trustworthy source.

The lack of evidence means we have reason to doubt. Remember, we start every claim with skepticism, and we need compelling evidence that it is true, or at least likely true. The more fantastic the claim, the more exceptional the evidence is required.

The trial is actually for those that negate valid evidence.

There is no valid evidence to negate. So no warrants, no indictments, no trials. We critical thinkers are free.

It is a trial of one's own sense of Justice.

My sense of justice is that gays are allowed full access to opportunities and legal benefits as straight people, and that is because I can't accept the bigotry that your messenger advocates. The bigotry is a serious flaw.

Maybe it is possible that some will see that evidence is evidence, albeit not what they would want to see as evidence for God.

There are many types of evidence and it is offered in this OP, that the evidence God gives humanity is, 1) The Person, 2 the Revelation and 3 the Message.

So the debate would not be about if it is evidence, but what does that evidence show us.

You want to assume there is valid evidence, and discuss this hypothetically. But why?

 

[John53]

Maybe it is possible that some will see that evidence is evidence, albeit not what they would want to see as evidence for God.

There are many types of evidence and it is offered in this OP, that the evidence God gives humanity is, 1) The Person, 2 the Revelation and 3 the Message.

So the debate would not be about if it is evidence, but what does that evidence show us.

Regards Tony

In my opinion that's a load of twaddle just to say "I will only debate those that agree with me".

I suggest you google the meaning of 'debate' and 'proselytising'. And maybe the Aussie term 'a fair go'.

 

[loverofhumanity]

No, its if to the evidence, whether it can be tested and if proven false then discarded or amended and te-tested.

This evidence can be tested in the heart of every fair minded observer.

I had a very difficult time trying to prove it false. After a few years I found the claim to be true.

Investigating truth is a process that takes time and there are no guarantees. I was just very lucky because I set out to prove Them (God, Prophets, Baha’u’llah) false but by accident found Them to be true.

Others still investigate. I wish them all the best with whatever they find.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

This evidence can be tested in the heart of every fair minded observer.

I had a very difficult time trying to prove it false. After a few years I found the claim to be true.

Investigating truth is a process that takes time and there are no guarantees. I was just very lucky because I set out to prove Them (God, Prophets, Baha’u’llah) false but by accident found Them to be true.

Others still investigate. I wish them all the best with whatever they find.

Can you share what specifically made you find them to be true?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

In my opinion that's a load of twaddle just to say "I will only debate those that agree with me".

I suggest you google the meaning of 'debate' and 'proselytising'. And maybe the Aussie term 'a fair go'.

A fair go is to provide the evidence that each person can choose to look at, or choose not to look at. God is the fairest of them all.

The point of the OP is that is is undebateable that evidence is provided. So I will not debate that.

It is the position of the OP that it is more than obvious that evidence has been provided, it would be a more logical and just position to offer that one does not except the evidence given is proof of God.

I have absolutely no interest in proselytising.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

Can you share what specifically made you find them to be true?

I’ll try as best I can. But there are some things that just can’t be expressed through the media of language.

‘How many are the truths which the garment of words cannot contain’. And..

‘Only heart to heart can speak the bliss of mystic knowers’ (Baha’u’llah)

Buddhists call it ‘enlightenment’. To Christians it is to be ‘saved’ or ‘reborn’ and to Baha’is it is the station of ‘certitude’ of knowing, not just believing. But seeing with the eyes of God.

This station cannot be attained unaided but needs to be confirmed by God. The seeker can only find the truth by the grace of God not through prayer, meditation or good deeds unaided.

When certain conditions are met, it is said then the ‘mystic herald’ will breathe the truth into the soul. These are the conditions. It’s called ‘The Tablet of the True Seeker’. Link below. (Link is correct)

Captcha

Some never fulfil these conditions, some over a lifetime and with myself about 3 years.

My mindset at the time was that I could not accept the disunity between people and religions as I saw us all as fellow human beings. This led me to the Baha’i Faith whose goal is unity and that we are all one human family.

But the real confirmation came when I realised Who Baha’u’llah actually was and it to this day, 48 years later, it still staggers me that humanity has still not discovered this greatest of all Secrets.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Can you share what specifically made you find them to be true?

I’ll try as best I can. But there are some things that just can’t be expressed through the media of language.

‘How many are the truths which the garment of words cannot contain’. And..

‘Only heart to heart can speak the bliss of mystic knowers’ (Baha’u’llah)

Buddhists call it ‘enlightenment’. To Christians it is to be ‘saved’ or ‘reborn’ and to Baha’is it is the station of ‘certitude’ of knowing, not just believing. But seeing with the eyes of God.

This station cannot be attained unaided but needs to be confirmed by God. The seeker can only find the truth by the grace of God not through prayer, meditation or good deeds unaided.

When certain conditions are met, it is said then the ‘mystic herald’ will breathe the truth into the soul. These are the conditions. It’s called ‘The Tablet of the True Seeker’. Link below. (Link is correct)

Captcha

Some never fulfil these conditions, some over a lifetime and with myself about 3 years.

My mindset at the time was that I could not accept the disunity between people and religions as I saw us all as fellow human beings. This led me to the Baha’i Faith whose goal is unity and that we are all one human family.

But the real confirmation came when I realised Who Baha’u’llah actually was and it to this day, 48 years later, it still staggers me that humanity has still not discovered this greatest of all Secrets.

The great thing is, the evidence speaks to people in different ways.

For me, it was the Oneness of Humanity, the Equality of Men and Women and the elimination of predudices. These aspects resonated with me as the requirements needed for peace.

This allowed me to further research the evidence provided and I was able to determine much of what has been offered has unfolded and is still unfolding.

Regards Tony

 

[John53]

A fair go is to provide the evidence that each person can choose to look at, or choose not to look at.

Not if you're unwilling to debate the validity of the evidence. Forcing others to accept your evidence as fact is not "a fair go"

God is the fairest of them all.

Is that a statement or are you claiming it as a fact?

The point of the OP is that is is undebateable that evidence is provided. So I will not debate that.

So it should not be in a debate forum if you're unwilling to debate the premise.

It is the position of the OP that it is more than obvious that evidence has been provided, it would be a more logical and just position to offer that one does not except the evidence given is proof of God.

In my opinion the only thing that's obvious gauging by the majority of responses is that you are wrong about having provided any worth while evidence.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I’ll try as best I can. But there are some things that just can’t be expressed through the media of language.

‘How many are the truths which the garment of words cannot contain’. And..

‘Only heart to heart can speak the bliss of mystic knowers’ (Baha’u’llah)

Buddhists call it ‘enlightenment’. To Christians it is to be ‘saved’ or ‘reborn’ and to Baha’is it is the station of ‘certitude’ of knowing, not just believing. But seeing with the eyes of God.

This station cannot be attained unaided but needs to be confirmed by God. The seeker can only find the truth by the grace of God not through prayer, meditation or good deeds unaided.

When certain conditions are met, it is said then the ‘mystic herald’ will breathe the truth into the soul. These are the conditions. It’s called ‘The Tablet of the True Seeker’. Link below. (Link is correct)

Captcha

Some never fulfil these conditions, some over a lifetime and with myself about 3 years.

My mindset at the time was that I could not accept the disunity between people and religions as I saw us all as fellow human beings. This led me to the Baha’i Faith whose goal is unity and that we are all one human family.

But the real confirmation came when I realised Who Baha’u’llah actually was and it to this day, 48 years later, it still staggers me that humanity has still not discovered this greatest of all Secrets.

The great thing is, the evidence speaks to people in different ways.

For me, it was the Oneness of Humanity, the Equality of Men and Women and the elimination of predudices. These aspects resonated with me as the requirements needed for peace.

This allowed me to further research the evidence provided and I was able to determine much of what has been offered has unfolded and is still unfolding.

Regards Tony

It seems that you agreed with some of the tenet’s of this religion when you did your deep research into it. And that is good, more power to you, but it still isn’t evidence.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

“The proof is that a guy wrote many writings with huge claims”
“Is there any evidence that those claims are true?”
“The writing is the proof. If you don’t see it as proof then I can’t help you.”

This debate is meaningless and the promise of the OP is empty. You haven’t given anything substantial enough to convince anyone of anything.

I am not trying to convince anyone, but to offer that it is undebateable that evidence is evidence.

The whole of body of the evidence provided contains the proofs, as described by @loverofhumanity. One has to look at the evidence if they want to determine if it does proves anything.

As offered the debatable point is if the evidence does contain proofs, not that there is no evidence.

Regards Tony

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I am not trying to convince anyone, but to offer that it is undebateable that evidence is evidence.

The whole of body of the evidence provided contains the proofs, as described by @loverofhumanity. One has to look at the evidence if they want to determine if it does proves anything.

As offered the debatable point is if the evidence does contain proofs, not that there is no evidence.

Regards Tony

The evidence doesn't contain proofs - at least, not to a non-Baha'i.

The concept of what is evidence and what isn't, is debatable, though - at least when talking people of different backgrounds, etc, and what they consider evidence. At least sometimes. It especially can be when the question is particularly tricky if something is considered actual evidence. Or at least, "proper evidence".

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It seems that you agreed with some of the tenet’s of this religion when you did your deep research into it. And that is good, more power to you, but it still isn’t evidence.

How do you prove something without evidence?

Regards Tony

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

How do you prove something without evidence?

Regards Tony

By being the better arguer of the two.

But that only works on a weak mind. And it isn't a good way of convincing someone.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

The evidence doesn't contain proofs - at least, not to a non-Baha'i.

The concept of what is evidence and what isn't, is debatable, though - at least when talking people of different backgrounds, etc, and what they consider evidence. At least sometimes. It especially can be when the question is particularly tricky if something is considered actual evidence. Or at least, "proper evidence".

I am happy with that, we have determined it is evidence that does not supply proofs for some people.

That is the point of the OP, it is tiresome that people keep saying there is no evidence. Regards Tony

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I am happy with that, we have determined it is evidence that does not supply proofs for some people.

That is the point of the OP, it is tiresome that people keep saying there is no evidence. Regards Tony

I'd say there is evidence if you were asking me, but that said evidence isn't particularly strong at least to a non-Baha'i.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

By being the better arguer of the two.

But that only works on a weak mind. And it isn't a good way of convincing someone.

What is the content of the argument, if it is not over the evidence one has to prove a point.

Regards Tony

 

[sayak83]

This OP is to finalise once and for all what is Evidence of God. After this OP there will be no need for anyone to demand evidence, as it will have been provided.

This OP is applicable to all Faiths Moses and Torah, Jesus New Testament, Muhammad Koran, etc), but I will use what has been offered in the Bahai writings.

So Evidence of the Hidden God.

"He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person." Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah

After the Manifestations have left the earth, the Word remains as the proof

"Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful." Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah

So the trial begins, the evidence is already boxed, the defendant/s stand in front of all Humanity

So what can be provided are the links to all the proof given by the Manifestations (defendants).

The person of the Manifestation is one line of evidence, Character references are available.

The Guidence/Wrirings given by them is the other line of Evidence left, that can be linked.

That is all the defendant will give as proof of God.

Now the key here is, we all get to be the jury and the judge. The Manifestations will individually submit to your verdict, so the burden of Justice now falls upon each individual.

Regards Tony

This is like saying
" This boxed chicken egg in front of me in the breakfast table is the full and final evidence of God. Its perfect whiteness and oval symmetry is the definitive proof of the perfections innate in God. The beautiful omelet that come out from this egg is further proof of the Most High. Thus every person who sees a chicken egg and the final omelet has all the evidence one needs of the existence of the He Who is everlastingly Hidden and will have no excuse at the time of the final Judgement."

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

What is the content of the argument, if it is not over the evidence one has to prove a point.

Regards Tony

In the case of winning an argument by being a better arguer, and not necessarily having good evidence, I'd say it's just one person trying to prove their thoughts. And somehow, some way, the other side agreeing with them - I'm not sure why that happens, but I've seen it happen before. Maybe the other side just becomes motivated by that person's message and charisma.