God’s Method of delivering messages, is it flawed?

[PAUL MARKHAM]

They mean what they say.

They mean everyone just follows what Bahaullah decrees.

 

[night912]

You have no evidence to prove that "God wants everyone to believe that he exists" or that "God wants everyone to receive his message" so that is a bald assertion.

If God is Omnipotent and God wanted either of those two things, then God could have gotten them by whatever method He chose.

It is completely illogical to say that an Omnipotent God could not get whatever He wanted.

When you want to someone to see that their reasoning is irrational, using that person's way of reasoning from the opposite view usually does the trick.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

I never suggested anyone do that.

Yes it does. Oneness means dropping everything else. Do you rejoice that nearly half of America voted for Trump?

Baha'is is all about coming together and dropping the things that identify us.

 

[Aupmanyav]

They mean what they say.

Yeah, they mean: "Independent investigation of truth" which is correct only if you accept what the Bahai triad said.

You have no evidence to prove that "God wants everyone to believe that he exists" or that "God wants everyone to receive his message" so that is a bald assertion.

Why does not your Allah want every one to receive his message?

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Everyone is not going to drop the things that they now believe and follow Baha'u'llah and they do not have to do that in order for the goals of Baha'u'llah to be achieved, as people of disparate beliefs can work together in harmony and unity. We can see that happening in America right now, as the unity of mankind that was predicted by Baha'u'llah is unfolding before our very eyes. I'm so happy.

“The utterance of God is a lamp, whose light is these words: Ye are the fruits of one tree, and the leaves of one branch. Deal ye one with another with the utmost love and harmony, with friendliness and fellowship. He Who is the Day Star of Truth beareth Me witness! So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth. The one true God, He Who knoweth all things, Himself testifieth to the truth of these words.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 288

What makes you happy that nearly half of Americans who voted, voted for Trump?

Trump gets in, so a move away from what Bahaullah wrote. Trump loses so a move to what Bahaullah wrote. And we are all coming together. LOL

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

That is absolutely absurd. Since God sends the message to suit the times people are living in, of course the message would be different at different times, in order to fit the needs of the people.

If it existed god wouldn't shape his messages to suit us. It would send messages to suit it.

A manmade god does send messages to pull in believers.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Yeah, they mean: "Independent investigation of truth" which is correct only if you accept what the Bahai triad said.Why does not your Allah want every one to receive his message?

■The oneness of God = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.
■The essential unity of religion = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.
■The unity of mankind = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.
■Harmony of religion and science = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.
■Independent investigation of truth = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.
■The need for universal compulsory education = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.
■The need for a universal auxiliary language
■Obedience to government and non-involvement in partisan politics = Believing what Bahaullah tells you to believe.

There is absolutely no point in telling people to come together to oppose Bahaullah, to find fault in what he wrote, to teach them he got it wrong, etc.

 

[Aupmanyav]

We can see that happening in America right now, as the unity of mankind that was predicted by Baha'u'llah is unfolding before our very eyes. I'm so happy.

"He Who knoweth all things, Himself testifieth to the truth of these words.”

I do not see unity among Americans. They bought a record number of firearms in recent days. They voted nearly half and half for their different candidates. We will probably see them go to court soon. What unity do you see, Trailblazer? They are more deeply divided than ever.
How has your Allah testified the words of your 19th Century Iranian preacher?

 

[night912]

Then why do atheists avoid answering my questions when I try to apply logic and reasoning?
For example, I asked:

Trailblazer said: You expect God to do the things that would convince you if He is capable. Otherwise you consider God a dolt.
If that is not what you are saying, correct me.

Why should God do the things that would convince you just because God is capable of doing those things?

Why wouldn't Joe answer that question? Can you answer it?

Your refusal to acknowledge that atheists have not answered your questions does not make your claim about it as being true.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I only ever said that the dispensations of the older religions have been abrogated, and that the older religions do not have the solutions to the problems that humanity is facing in this new age.

What evidence can you give for this abrogation, TrailBlazer?

Trailblazer said: You expect God to do the things that would convince you if He is capable. Otherwise you consider God a dolt.
If that is not what you are saying, correct me.
Why should God do the things that would convince you just because God is capable of doing those things?

Well, atheists do not even believe in existence of God / Allah. What should we answer? For us, you are just talking non-sense.
If God / Allah does not even exist then how can this fictitious entity do this thing or that. Only Cthulhu or the Holy Flying Spaghetti Monster can do these things.

 

[night912]

Explain why that is dishonest, according to the following definition.

Dishonest: behaving or prone to behave in an untrustworthy or fraudulent way.
dishonest means - Google Search

If a believer believes that God's understanding of logic and reasoning is beyond our capability for example, how is stating that as a belief dishonest? Is it because atheists have nowhere to go with their arguments that attempt to determine what God could/would/should do if that is true?

That is not the meaning for my usage of "dishonest."

I am referring to intellectual dishonesty.

I agree that all discussions should be based upon our capacity of understanding, but I would not label people as honest or dishonest, because that is a judgment and a discussion ender.

Intellectual dishonesty.

 

[night912]

I have no goalpost because I have no goals. I just speak honestly about what I believe and people can take it or leave it.

I did not contradict myself because God wants nothing for Himself although God wants things for humans.
That is no different from me saying I do not want a new Mercedes for myself but I want to buy a new Mercedes for my husband.

And there goes the goalpost, moving exactly how it was prepped to do.

 

[Goddess Kit]

I only ever said that the dispensations of the older religions have been abrogated, and that the older religions do not have the solutions to the problems that humanity is facing in this new age.

That makes perfect sense.

Religions are created during a specific time period and in reference to the people of that time. Men, the creators of religion, would have to know the future in order to create a religion to span infinity, and man simply does not have the capability to foresee the future. Heck, most times men cannot even properly understand the times in which they currently live.

People, society, evolve. Therefore, a religion created during a specific time period and for a specific people of that era cannot reasonably be used for a people and a society that evolve well beyond the past.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

Your refusal to acknowledge that atheists have not answered your questions does not make your claim about it as being true.

I have answered her over and over again. She keeps referring to "you" as if it's only you that wants to know. It's the billions who worship different gods, no gods, different prophets etc.

Again I will answer her question.

To prove god exists.
To prove it's not manmade.
To show which version is the right one, if any.
To show which religion is the right one, if any.
To show which prophet is the right one, if any.
To tell us what to do.

It wants us to believe in it, it wants us to do what it says, but it keeps confusing us with different messengers the majority of are manmade. Only 1 can be the right one, but all can be the wrong ones.

 

[night912]

If god wants everyone to believe He exists and God does want everyone to receive his message. He's going about it in a very bad way.

So as to be relevant to this thread, it can be said that God's method is flawed.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

So as to be relevant to this thread, it can be said that God's method is flawed.

If a god exists, it's going the right way to make sure it does get the method flawed.

If it's manmade, and in many instances, it is proven it is. It is going the right way to make sure of more manmade gods. This can be proven.

 

[Goddess Kit]

A god's message is so indistinguishable from man's message that one truly has a difficult time determining whether man is divinely inspired or merely following the delusion presented by his mind.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

A god's message is so indistinguishable from man's message that one truly has a difficult time determining whether man is divinely inspired or merely following the delusion presented by his mind.

We can see why gods came before the concept of modern gods were invented by looking at what isolated tribes worship. Gods of the things they knew and the times of the year,

Then as people evolved the concept of one god grew from that. But this one god was capable of inflicting natural disasters on Man. Floods, Plagues, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, etc. A crossover to the 1 god concept with old god capabilities.

 

[Goddess Kit]

We can see why gods came before the concept of modern gods were invented by looking at what isolated tribes worship. Gods of the things they knew and the times of the year,

Then as people evolved the concept of one god grew from that. But this one god was capable of inflicting natural disasters on Man. Floods, Plagues, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, etc. A crossover to the 1 god concept with old god capabilities.

Indeed, the god concept evolves as man evolves. Hopefully, until the time when we're all universally capable of understanding that there is no need for the god concept in our lives.

 

[Vinayaka]

That makes perfect sense.

Religions are created during a specific time period and in reference to the people of that time. Men, the creators of religion, would have to know the future in order to create a religion to span infinity, and man simply does not have the capability to foresee the future. Heck, most times men cannot even properly understand the times in which they currently live.

People, society, evolve. Therefore, a religion created during a specific time period and for a specific people of that era cannot reasonably be used for a people and a society that evolve well beyond the past.

Some religions or sects do evolve, adapt, use modern technology, address the needs of the day, or don't focus on social issues much at all. If the main goal is character development, that works in any period.

But yes, if the religion;s origin had hard and fast rules, an infallible leader, absurd class structures, then it's nigh impossible to adapt to change.