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

[PAUL MARKHAM]

God Has a detectible Manifestation, His name was Baha’u’llah.

Then your god isn't very great. Most people have never heard of him. Like Jesus in his day few had ever heard of him it was only the work of Paul, Peter and a few others that got his name out.

Or it's all a con.

People can make their own minds up.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

I never said only the messengers get the messages and in a form, us mere mortals won't understand.
In fact, I said the exact opposite. I said that the Messengers get the message in a form humans CAN understand; and that is the whole reason why God uses Messengers, because their communication is understandable to humans.

I caught you out again

You are free to believe whatever you want to, but I believe that God has conferred upon the Messengers of God a spiritual nature that other humans do not possess, and that is why they alone understand communication from God.

Logically speaking, an All-Knowing God knows more than you do about the best Method of communication.

God does not want to communicate directly to humans, what about that do you NOT understand, and an omnipotent God only does what He wants to do.

You really don’t get it do you, YOU want God to communicate directly to humans, but obviously God does not want to, and that is one reason among many that he doesn’t.

Here's the link. God’s Method of delivering messages, is it flawed?

Did you forget what you posted?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Just because God knows our choices, does not mean we do not have the ability to change

Except that it does.
If you can change your mind, it means you can be unpredictable.
If you are unpredictable, then you aren't predictable.
If you aren't predictable, then one can't know with certainty what you'll do before you do it.

Can't have one without the other.
Either stuff is predetermined or it isn't.

If it is, perfect foreknowledge is possible.
if it isn't, then it isn't.

God knows if we will change, or will not change with the choices put in front of us, but the choices are always there.

If it is known before hand that you'll change your mind, it only means you were pre-determined to "change your mind".

The choices aren't really there if it is known before hand what you'll do.
If it can be known with 100% certainty that you'll "choose" B, then A was never really an option. At best, you'ld have the illusion of having made a free choice.

It takes effort to change and we always find change is not what we like. It easier to take the easy path and say God should do it all for me, or the even easier way and do what we think is best.

That couldn't be more irrelevant to the point if you tried.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I predicted you would say that because it is a common atheist ploy... been there done that.

There's nothing "atheist" or "ploy" about it.
YOU are the one making the argument. YOU are the one making the claims. YOU are the one who's "defending" your claims by saying things like "god has a plan".

You ARE a human and not a god, right?

But an Infallible God cannot need any cop-outs

But I'm not talking to an infallible God. I'm talking to a fallible human.
You are the one who needs the cop-outs.

- from me or anyone else - because He can make no mistakes...
A common mistake atheists make.

There are no mistakes here. I'm talking to YOU, a human, who is making the claims and defending them with cop-outs.


Not sure why you are dragging the god you claim exists into this. That entity is not part of this conversation (or indeed any conversation).

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, they would be logical explanations based upon who God really is rather than what you imagine God to be.

How do you I differentiate your claims about who god really is from you imagining who god really is?

An Infallible God cannot ever need any cop-outs... Try to think about why.

I'm talking to you. You are making the claims. You're the one who needs the cop-outs.
Your god is not part of this conversation.

Only fallible humans need cop-outs because only fallible humans make mistakes.

Curiously though, you seem to be ruling out the possibility of you being one of those humans.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, just a belief.

Same thing. When you make a claim, you imply belief in said claim. When you express a belief, you do so by stating the claim that is being believed.

Can't have one without the other.

It is God who claims to be omnipotent.

To be exact, it's people claiming to speak for a god who say that. And you believe those (fallible) humans.

God has no tracks, because has never left a trace.

So much for you claim that you have evidence. Now I also know why you refuse to share that "evidence".

God is not hiding anything but His Essence, He reveals His Attributes and His Will for humans.

Yeah, like to that woman who drowned her 3 kids because god revealed that as his will to her.

I ma not complaining, I am just saying it is illogical to come up with alternatives to what God actually does

Then why did you ask for an alternative, if you believed it is impossible to provide one?
Also clearly it wasn't impossible, because I came up with one.

, as if you could know MORE than an All-Knowing God about the best course of action.

Well, assuming you are correct about your god claims that don't match the facts of reality, I think it's quite obvious that I would do a MUCH better job then him in making my presence and actual will known to all humans in such a way that nobody in his right mind could ever deny it.

And besides that, you do not KNOW what God is trying to accomplish, and without the Plan you cannot have a strategy, so your strategy for God's communication are only what you believe God should be trying to accomplish.

The "Plan", capital P. Yes, yes, The Great Mysterious Plan.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

"God has no tracks, because has never left a trace."

So where do people get all their information on this god?

It seems this traceless god is a figment of Men's imaginations.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, He was a Manifestation of God with a twofold nature, human and divine.

Just another claim.
I just read about a dude who claims to be the reincarnation of Jesus in Russia. He has plenty of followers. All of them would say exactly what you just said, only they would say it about him and call yours an imposter.

And both your arguments have the same merrit: none.

Of course claiming it does not make it so and evidence does not make it so either...

Evidence would make it so. Or at least, it would make it likely. But you don't have such evidence.

Reality simply exists so He either was or He wasn't.

And which seems more plausible?
I say that he wasn't, just like that Jesus incarnation fellow in Russia, is infinitly more likely.

Take that up with God

I would, but it's not like I can phone him up or something.
I'ld also go and search for the pots of gold that the leprechauns have stashed away at the base of the rainbow, but you know.... it's kind of hard.

He is the one who is not answerable to humans.

Neither are leprechauns.
Something you like to hide behind, as if it gives you a free pass to not care about evidence and being rationally justified in your claims.

Convenient for a God that wants to remain a mystery, not convenient for me.

Off course it is convenient for you. It's yet another excuse for you to use to avoid meeting your burden of proof.

God has no partners so God was never married.

WOOSH, that's the sound of the point flying over your head.

No, a claim with evidence to back it up.

The evidence that you conveniently refuse to share?

God's methods cannot be compared to human activities, that is illogical.

Well, it is what you said though.

Sorry, I just report the Truth about God and try to clear up misconceptions.

Capital T. lol.
I love theists sometimes. It's like the lesser evidence they have, the more certain they are.

I have shared it on this forum umpteen million times. Is there a good reason I should share it again?

Link to one of those umpteen million posts where you share this evidence?

I am always ready.

Are you? I still haven't seen any evidence.

But that is all in the past now, this is a new age.

Is it?

Sectarian violence among Muslims - Wikipedia



Why cry over spilled milk?[/QUOTE]

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

that is the whole reason why God uses Messengers, because their communication is understandable to humans.

And yet for some reason, christianity alone (for example) exploded into some 30.000 different denominations.
And yet for some reason, every distinct (sub) culture has its own unique mutually exclusive religion, or a variation of a religion coming from a culture with whom they had contact.

If you were correct I would expect to see AT LEAST one example of a religion that pops up in two distinct independent culture.

But that NEVER happens. Worse even: the more distinct the cultures (ie: the less contact between them), the more different the religions are.

Exactly as I would expect if all religions are invented by humans.
The exact opposite of what I would expect of some of them came from a single common source - let alone all of them.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

There are so many charlatans posing as the next messiah, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha or whatever with loads of followers. That it only confirms some people need religion above everything else.

Otherwise explain why so many follow Hubbard, Marshall, Jones, Manson,
Asahara, Mambro, Applewhite, and that's just scratching the surface of modern times.

Cult leaders - Google Search

Disturbing Cults - Google Search

They can't all be right, but they could all be wrong.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That couldn't be more irrelevant to the point if you tried.

Is it?

I think it was the most relevant part!

Please carry on as you see best and continue to make your own choices.

I see there are better choices available.

Why I see there is little hope for those that do not beleive in God is under the spoiler following, it should only be read by those who want to know why, so here it is;

Spoiler

".. Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth. He that acteth treacherously towards God will, also, act treacherously towards his king. Nothing whatever can deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him from betraying his neighbor, nothing can induce him to walk uprightly... "

Unlike Trailblazer, that is more optimistic about atheists than I am and much more patient, I am happy to leave you to yourself.

Maybe the spoiler is naught but truth?

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

CG Didymus said: So isn't that implying that when Jesus returns there will be no more wars? Yet, Baha'is say Jesus, or The Christ, has returned as Baha'u'llah, but there is still wars going on.

Paul said: Which proves they're talking BS.

Matthew 24:6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

The verse above is what CG was referring to but it does not say that when Jesus comes there will be no more wars.
Besides that, Jesus is not coming back to earth EVER... He clearly said He was not going to return right before He left.
Apparently Christians who are waiting for the SAME Jesus to return have a reading comprehension problem.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

John 17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

 

[Trailblazer]

There are so many charlatans posing as the next messiah, Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha or whatever with loads of followers. That it only confirms some people need religion above everything else.

Otherwise explain why so many follow Hubbard, Marshall, Jones, Manson,
Asahara, Mambro, Applewhite, and that's just scratching the surface of modern times.

You have a legitimate point.
They follow false prophets because they are naive and foolish. Why do so many people vote for Trump?
I rest my case.

They can't all be right, but they could all be wrong.

Or maybe there is one who is right and all the rest are wrong.

 

[Trailblazer]

Unlike Trailblazer, that is more optimistic about atheists than I am and much more patient, I am happy to leave you to yourself.

I have the patience of Job, especially of something is important to me, but even my patience runs out eventually...
It just has not run out quite yet.

But Jesus did say something about shaking the dust off our feet, and Baha'u'llah said something similar, and my feet are getting pretty dusty from walking this dusty road.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then your god isn't very great.

It has nothing to do with God, because God is not the one who is responsible for getting the message of Baha'u'llah out.

Most people have never heard of him. Like Jesus in his day few had ever heard of him it was only the work of Paul, Peter and a few others that got his name out.

And it will only be through the work of the Baha'is that the message of Baha'u'llah gets out.

Or it's all a con.

If it is a con, it would be the biggest con job ever foisted upon humanity.

People can make their own minds up.

That's right, that is the beauty of free will.

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: I never said only the messengers get the messages and in a form, us mere mortals won't understand.
In fact, I said the exact opposite. I said that the Messengers get the message in a form humans CAN understand; and that is the whole reason why God uses Messengers, because their communication is understandable to humans.

I caught you out again

You are free to believe whatever you want to, but I believe that God has conferred upon the Messengers of God a spiritual nature that other humans do not possess, and that is why they alone understand communication from God.

Logically speaking, an All-Knowing God knows more than you do about the best Method of communication.

God does not want to communicate directly to humans, what about that do you NOT understand, and an omnipotent God only does what He wants to do.

You really don’t get it do you, YOU want God to communicate directly to humans, but obviously God does not want to, and that is one reason among many that he doesn’t.

Here's the link. God’s Method of delivering messages, is it flawed?

Did you forget what you posted?

No, I did not forget.
What's your point?
Cut to the chase.

 

[Trailblazer]

There's nothing "atheist" or "ploy" about it.
YOU are the one making the argument. YOU are the one making the claims. YOU are the one who's "defending" your claims by saying things like "god has a plan".

You ARE a human and not a god, right?

But I'm not talking to an infallible God. I'm talking to a fallible human.
You are the one who needs the cop-outs.

Why would I need cop-outs... What am I trying to cop out if?

There are no mistakes here. I'm talking to YOU, a human, who is making the claims and defending them with cop-outs.

What are these cop-outs?
I am just explaining what God actually does. I am sorry you don't like it, but that is not my problem, nor is it cop-out.

Not sure why you are dragging the god you claim exists into this. That entity is not part of this conversation (or indeed any conversation).

Then what is this conversation all about?

 

[Trailblazer]

How do you I differentiate your claims about who god really is from you imagining who god really is?

I believe I know as much as I can know about what God is because of what Baha'u'llah wrote about God.

I'm talking to you. You are making the claims. You're the one who needs the cop-outs.
Your god is not part of this conversation.

You are talking to me but I am not the one who made the claims about God; Baha'u'llah made those claims, so it is He who would need a cop-out if His claims were false.

Put quite simply, Baha'u'llah was the Messenger of God, and I am just the messenger for the Messenger, relaying information to you.

Curiously though, you seem to be ruling out the possibility of you being one of those humans.

Of course I am fallible, all humans are fallible.
But that does not mean that I made a mistake about Baha'u'llah being a Messenger of God, it only means that I am capable of making a mistake.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Is it?

I think it was the most relevant part!

It's not because it has nothing to do with the conflict between a deterministic universe, where perfect foreknowledge is possible, or a universe with uncertainty concerning the future, where such foreknowledge is not possible.

Please carry on as you see best and continue to make your own choices.

I see there are better choices available.

Why I see there is little hope for those that do not beleive in God is under the spoiler following, it should only be read by those who want to know why, so here it is;

Spoiler

".. Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, is the truth, the undoubted truth. He that acteth treacherously towards God will, also, act treacherously towards his king. Nothing whatever can deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him from betraying his neighbor, nothing can induce him to walk uprightly... "

Unlike Trailblazer, that is more optimistic about atheists than I am and much more patient, I am happy to leave you to yourself.

Maybe the spoiler is naught but truth?

Regards Tony

This again has nothing to do with the point at hand of determinism vs uncertainty and how that affects the possibility of foreknowledge as well as the idea of free will.

But as I said when mentioning the point at hand briefly when it was brought up, this thread isn't the place for it anyway.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Why would I need cop-outs... What am I trying to cop out if?

What are these cop-outs?
I am just explaining what God actually does. I am sorry you don't like it, but that is not my problem, nor is it cop-out.

Then what is this conversation all about?

I can no longer take this seriously.
Seems like you've gone so out of your way with your "arguments" that you even completely lost track of what was being discussed.