How do Baha’is see atheists?

[Trailblazer]

I am a Baha’i, and I have posted to a lot of atheists over the last 10 years on various forums so I am well aware of their position about God’s existence.

As I see it, regarding God’s existence there are three mutually exclusive logical possibilities, given the evidence we have.

1. God exists and sends Messengers to communicate to humans (theist), or​

2. God exists and doesn’t communicate to humans (deist), or​

3. God does not exist (atheist)​

Atheists hold the third logical position, that God doesn’t exist. I consider that to be a logical position since there is no proof that God exists.

I know what I think about atheists, but I never knew what other Baha’is think, so I was happy to see this thread posted on a Baha'i Forum.
For any Baha’is or atheists who are curious what Baha’is think about atheists you can read on this thread:
https://www.reddit.com/r/bahai/comments/13vz3t2

 

[Sirona]

Duh ...

Even if Baha'i disliked atheists, they wouldn't say so, because the goal of this thread, in my opinion, is to arouse sympathy for Baha'is. On the other hand, at least in this forum, Baha'is have had so many controversial discussions with theists (despite their teaching that religion should not lead to controversy among people) that they might now want to try to persuade atheists instead.

 

[lukethethird]

How do Baha’is see atheists?​

Who cares?

 

[PureX]

As I see it, regarding God’s existence there are three mutually exclusive logical possibilities, given the evidence we have.

1. God exists and sends Messengers to communicate to humans (theist), or​

2. God exists and doesn’t communicate to humans (deist), or​

3. God does not exist (atheist)​

Atheists hold the third logical position, that God doesn’t exist. I consider that to be a logical position since there is no proof that God exists.

God could exist and communicate with us directly via conscience, intuition, and circumstance. Why is this not an option for you?
Why would God use "messengers" to communicate with people when doing it that way is so obviously and clearly prone to error and abuse?
Why would God ever need to communicate with humans? This implies a separation between God and humanity that God doesn't want, and yet apparently does want. And that doesn't make sense.

I see the Baha'i religion as being very dependent on this "messenger" idea. And it seriously discredits it in my eyes. Not unlike that crazy business about Joseph Smith does with the Mormons. As individuals, I find these religious adherents to have a lot to recommend them. But as a religious dogma, these "messenger" issues present a wall to me that I could never get around.

 

[Trailblazer]

Even if Baha'i disliked atheists, they wouldn't say so, because the goal of this thread, in my opinion, is to arouse sympathy for Baha'is.

The only person who know the purpose of this thread was the person who started it.
There was no goal. I just wanted to share something I saw on a Baha'i forum. It was purely informational.
Then I shared my opinion, as was posted in the OP.

 

[Trailblazer]

God could exist and communicate with us directly via conscience, intuition, and circumstance. Why is this not an option for you?

I did not list that as one of the three logical possibilities since there is no evidence that God communicate directly with anyone.
If God does not communicate directly that means that God would not communicate directly if God existed. That is the only logical conclusion.

Why would God use "messengers" to communicate with people when doing it that way is so obviously and clearly prone to error and abuse?

What makes you think there is a better way?
How else could God communicate everything He communicates to Messengers such that everyone in the world would have access to that information?
The method of communication is not faulty. The errors and the abuses are on the part of the people who receive, or fail to receive, the messages.

Why would God ever need to communicate with humans? This implies a separation between God and humanity that God doesn't want, and yet apparently does want. And that doesn't make sense.

If God never communicated to humans how could humans ever know what God's will is for humans?
Who said that God does not want a separation between Himself and humans? Based upon the following passage, I believe God does want separation since I believe He has it, and God would not be separated from humans unless He wanted to be..

“He is, and hath from everlasting been, one and alone, without peer or equal, eternal in the past, eternal in the future, detached from all things, ever-abiding, unchangeable, and self-subsisting. He hath assigned no associate unto Himself in His Kingdom, no counsellor to counsel Him, none to compare unto Him, none to rival His glory.” Gleanings, p. 192​

I see the Baha'i religion as being very dependent on this "messenger" idea. And it seriously discredits it in my eyes. Not unlike that crazy business about Joseph Smith does with the Mormons. As individuals, I find these religious adherents to have a lot to recommend them. But as a religious dogma, these "messenger" issues present a wall to me that I could never get around.

The Baha'i Faith isn't the only religion with Messengers. With the exception of Islam, other religions don't call these men Messengers, but nonetheless they are intermediaries between God and humanity. I can think of no other way that God could communicate with humanity but by using a Messenger who is both human and divine such that He can bridge the gap between God and humanity.

 

[PureX]

I did not list that as one of the three logical possibilities since there is no evidence that God communicate directly with anyone.

Aren't you assuming that God communicates with your messengers? How else do they get God's messages to deliver to everyone else?

If God does not communicate directly that means that God would not communicate directly if God existed. That is the only logical conclusion.

But if as you say God communicates with the messengers, why wouldn't God just communicate directly with us all, and skip the errant-prone messengers? It makes no sense.

What makes you think there is a better way?
How else could God communicate everything He communicates to Messengers such that everyone in the world would have access to that information?

Directly, just as you assume God is doing with the messengers. Why use messengers at all? Especially when they are prone to getting the message wrong, not getting it out fully, or even abusing it. We all have very good reasons to be skeptical of any human claiming to be God's messenger. So why would God use them when God could just deliver the message directly to anyone God chooses?

The method of communication is not faulty. The errors and the abuses are on the part of the people who receive, or fail to receive, the messages.

All the more reason to deliver the message directly, and skip the error=prone middleman.

If God never communicated to humans how could humans ever know what God's will is for humans?

It could be surmised from studying the nature of existence, as nearly all religions have been. Or it could be intuited from within one's own heart. That seems to be the more common means of determining God's will for most people even now.

The Baha'i Faith isn't the only religion with Messengers.

I'm just explaining why I can't get with the idea of messengers.

 

[Trailblazer]

Aren't you assuming that God communicates with your messengers? How else do they get God's messages to deliver to everyone else?

I believe (not assume) that God communicates to Messengers.

But if as you say God communicates with the messengers, why wouldn't God just communicate directly with us all, and skip the errant-prone messengers? It makes no sense.

Why do you assume that the problem is the Messengers, that they are somehow errant-prone, and thus the problem would be solved by God communicating to every human directly?

Why would God need to communicate to every one of the 7.9 billion people in the world in order to get a message out, when He could communicate to one Messenger who can offer that message to all 7.9 billion people? It makes no sense. On top of that that assumes that all those people could understand a message from God that was communicated to them directly, but there is no reason to believe that would ever be the case.

Granted, not everyone understand what Baha'u'llah wrote, and that is one reason why He appointed interpreters of His Writings who explain the message in a way that any third-grader could understand.

Directly, just as you assume God is doing with the messengers. Why use messengers at all? Especially when they are prone to getting the message wrong, not getting it out fully, or even abusing it. We all have very good reasons to be skeptical of any human claiming to be God's messenger. So why would God use them when God could just deliver the message directly to anyone God chooses?

Even if God could communicate everything He communicates to Messengers directly to all 7.9 billion people in the world, not one single person could understand what was communicated to them, since nobody has the capacity to understand what a Messenger of God can understand.

Even if some people could understand what was communicated, how many of the 7.9 billion people in the world are going to take 40 years off work to receive and write the 15,000 Tablets that Baha'u'llah wrote?

All the more reason to deliver the message directly, and skip the error=prone middleman.

Again, you are assuming that the Messengers are error-prone and that humans could understand all of what was delivered to the Messengers, but there is no reason to think than anyone (let alone everyone) could understand what was communicated to Baha'u'llah. The only errors are on the part of the people who receive, or fail to receive, the messages. Mistakes are unavoidable since humans are fallible.

It could be surmised from studying the nature of existence, as nearly all religions have been. Or it could be intuited from within one's own heart. That seems to be the more common means of determining God's will for most people even now.

When I said "what God's will is for humans" I meant what God' s purpose is for humans and the world we live in, how we should live and treat others and how we should take care of the world. God's will comes through the teachings and laws of the Messengers and it cannot be surmised by studying the nature of existence.

I'm just explaining why I can't get with the idea of messengers.

And I just explained why I don't think there is any other way for God to communicate to humans and accomplish His purposes.

 

[PureX]

I believe (not assume) that God communicates to Messengers.

Why do you assume that the problem is the Messengers, that they are somehow errant-prone, and thus the problem would be solved by God communicating to every human directly?

Because they are human. And not only that, but there are lots of false human messengers. All of which could be avoided if God just gave his message to us directly.

Why would God need to communicate to every one of the 7.9 billion people in the world in order to get a message out, when He could communicate to one Messenger who can offer that message to all 7.9 billion people?

Because it's an absurdly errant-prone method to use human messengers. Also, why would we assume it's a difficulty for God to communicate with us directly no matter how many of us there are?

It makes no sense. On top of that that assumes that all those people could understand a message from God that was communicated to them directly, but there is no reason to believe that would ever be the case.

Why are you assuming that for the messengers, then? Seems to me the odds of understanding are greater the more people he gives his message to.

Granted, not everyone understand what Baha'u'llah wrote, and that is one reason why He appointed interpreters of His Writings who explain the message in a way that any third-grader could understand.

And there's another layer of humans to screw up the message.

Even if God could communicate everything He communicates to Messengers directly to all 7.9 billion people in the world, not one single person could understand what was communicated to them, since nobody has the capacity to understand what a Messenger of God can understand.

This is just magical thinking. Humans are human, ... all of them. The messengers are just as errant-prone as any other humans are.

Even if some people could understand what was communicated, how many of the 7.9 billion people in the world are going to take 40 years off work to receive and write the 15,000 Tablets that Baha'u'llah wrote?

I have a friend that is an obsessive writer and has been his whole life. I am sure that by now he has hundreds of notebooks full of his musings.

you are assuming that the Messengers are error-prone and that humans could understand all of what was delivered to the Messengers, but there is no reason to think than anyone (let alone everyone) could understand what was communicated to Baha'u'llah. The only errors are on the part of the people who receive, or fail to receive, the messages. Mistakes are unavoidable since humans are fallible.

Yes, they are. All the more reason to give the messages directly to the people and cut out the error-prone middle man, as well as the phony messengers.

When I said "what God's will is for humans" I meant what God' s purpose is for humans and the world we live in, how we should live and treat others and how we should take care of the world. God's will comes through the teachings and laws of the Messengers and it cannot be surmised by studying the nature of existence.

I feel pretty sure that we have been given the right and ability to determine this purpose for ourselves. And that in doing so we are then responsible for who we become as a result. If God had wanted obedient robots, he would have made them. But instead he made us. Confused and willful as we are. Yet free to decide for ourselves why we exist and who we will become as a result. Seems pretty clear to me that THIS was God's will for us, and that all these "messengers" are playing at reading God's mind. Something any one of us can do for ourselves if we are so inclined. In fact, I think I just did.

 

[Audie]

I did not list that as one of the three logical possibilities since there is no evidence that God communicate directly with anyone.
If God does not communicate directly that means that God would not communicate directly if God existed. That is the only logical conclusion.

What makes you think there is a better way?
How else could God communicate everything He communicates to Messengers such that everyone in the world would have access to that information?
The method of communication is not faulty. The errors and the abuses are on the part of the people who receive, or fail to receive, the messages.

If God never communicated to humans how could humans ever know what God's will is for humans?
Who said that God does not want a separation between Himself and humans? Based upon the following passage, I believe God does want separation since I believe He has it, and God would not be separated from humans unless He wanted to be..

“He is, and hath from everlasting been, one and alone, without peer or equal, eternal in the past, eternal in the future, detached from all things, ever-abiding, unchangeable, and self-subsisting. He hath assigned no associate unto Himself in His Kingdom, no counsellor to counsel Him, none to compare unto Him, none to rival His glory.” Gleanings, p. 192​

The Baha'i Faith isn't the only religion with Messengers. With the exception of Islam, other religions don't call these men Messengers, but nonetheless they are intermediaries between God and humanity. I can think of no other way that God could communicate with humanity but by using a Messenger who is both human and divine such that He can bridge the gap between God and humanity.

If I were God, everyone would definitely
know everything I wanted them to know.

This God you talk about clearly is a klutz, far far
from omnipotent.

 

[rocala]

God could exist and communicate with us directly via conscience, intuition, and circumstance. Why is this not an option for you?

Thank you @PureX it is a question that I have asked since childhood and nobody has answered it once.

 

[Trailblazer]

If I were God, everyone would definitely
know everything I wanted them to know.

Everyone has the opportunity to know what God wants them to know.
If they don't know it that is because they reject God's Messengers.

This God you talk about clearly is a klutz, far far
from omnipotent.

An omnipotent God only does when He chooses to do. Any logical person could figure out why.
An omnipotent God would never do what you want Him to do, not unless He chose to do it.
You are not getting what you want because God does not choose to give it to you. It's that simple.

Omnipotence implies ability but it also implies that God only uses that ability as He chooses to, not as you want Him to.

Here is what omnipotence means, in a nutshell:

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p, 284​

​

“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” Gleanings, p. 209​

​

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73​

He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain.
That means you have no right to question what God ordains. It is what it is and YOU cannot change it.

for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will.
That means God has complete power and He does whatever He chooses to do, which implies that He is not going to do what you think He should do or what you want Him to do, unless He chooses to do it.

To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish.
That means if God feels like giving you something you will get it but if not you won’t.

I hope we have this cleared up now. God 101 stuff.

 

[Audie]

Everyone has the opportunity to know what God wants them to know.
If they don't know it that is because they reject God's Messengers.

An omnipotent God only does when He chooses to do. Any logical person could figure out why.
An omnipotent God would never do what you want Him to do, not unless He chose to do it.
You are not getting what you want because God does not choose to give it to you. It's that simple.

Omnipotence implies ability but it also implies that God only uses that ability as He chooses to, not as you want Him to.

Here is what omnipotence means, in a nutshell:

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p, 284​

​

“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” Gleanings, p. 209​

​

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” Gleanings, p. 73​

He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain.
That means you have no right to question what God ordains. It is what it is and YOU cannot change it.

for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will.
That means God has complete power and He does whatever He chooses to do, which implies that He is not going to do what you think He should do or what you want Him to do, unless He chooses to do it.

To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish.
That means if God feels like giving you something you will get it but if not you won’t.

I hope we have this cleared up now. God 101 stuff.

Call it remedial intro to made up stuff 099

 

[Trailblazer]

Because they are human.

Messengers of God are human but they are also divine. They have a twofold nature.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself. To this testifieth the tradition: “Manifold and mysterious is My relationship with God. I am He, Himself, and He is I, Myself, except that I am that I am, and He is that He is.” …. The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?”​

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67​

Because Messengers of God have a divine nature they can understand God and receive His communication through the Holy Spirit.
No ordinary human has a divine nature and that is why no ordinary human can understand God communicating to them directly..
Since Messengers are also human, they can relay God's messages to humans in a way that can be understood by humans.

And not only that, but there are lots of false human messengers. All of which could be avoided if God just gave his message to us directly.

For reasons noted above, God cannot give His message to humans directly and be understood.
False messengers can be avoided by properly investigating the alleged Messenger and the evidence He presented to support His claims.

Because it's an absurdly errant-prone method to use human messengers. Also, why would we assume it's a difficulty for God to communicate with us directly no matter how many of us there are?

I did not say it would be difficult for God, I said it is impossible for humans to understand God directly since we do not have a divine mind.

Moreover, if direct communication to everyone was the *best way* for God to communicate to humans, why would God not communicate that way?
Do you think God is a dummy? No, God is omniscient, so that means God has to know the *best way* to communicate to humans, from all the available options that could work to accomplish God's purposes.

Why are you assuming that for the messengers, then? Seems to me the odds of understanding are greater the more people he gives his message to.

As noted above, it doesn't work that way, not according to my beliefs. It does not matter how many people God gives His message to. They would not be able to understand it coming directly from God since ordinary humans do not have the capacity to understand God speaking directly to them.

And there's another layer of humans to screw up the message.

No, it is a way to clarify the message.

This is just magical thinking. Humans are human, ... all of them. The messengers are just as errant-prone as any other humans are.

You are free to believe that if you want to, just as I am free to believe what I believe. If I believed tat Messengers were only human then I would think like you, but I believe that they are another order of creation, above any ordinary human, since ethye alone have a twofold nature, divine and human.

I have a friend that is an obsessive writer and has been his whole life. I am sure that by now he has hundreds of notebooks full of his musings.

Does he also have a world religion with followers all over the world?

Yes, they are. All the more reason to give the messages directly to the people and cut out the error-prone middle man, as well as the phony messengers.

There is no way you can win this argument based upon logic. If God exists and communicates to humans we all know God does not communicate directly to everyone. That means that if God existed God would not communicate directly to everyone.

Do you think you know more than God regarding the *best way* to communicate to humans? That is logically impossible since no human is omniscient, let alone more than omniscient.

I feel pretty sure that we have been given the right and ability to determine this purpose for ourselves. And that in doing so we are then responsible for who we become as a result. If God had wanted obedient robots, he would have made them. But instead he made us. Confused and willful as we are. Yet free to decide for ourselves why we exist and who we will become as a result. Seems pretty clear to me that THIS was God's will for us, and that all these "messengers" are playing at reading God's mind. Something any one of us can do for ourselves if we are so inclined. In fact, I think I just did.

So Jesus Christ was just playing at reading God's mind and He fooled one-third of the world population?
As I said above, you are free to believe whatever you want to about Messengers, as we are all free to believe what we believe. Just don't pretend it holds up to logical scrutiny because it doesn't.

 

[osgart]

God could exist and communicate with us directly via conscience, intuition, and circumstance.

This would be the most plausible way a God would hint us as to God's existence. Although there are tragic circumstances in life for many that afford little opportunity to discover anything of a grande meaning from God. It would still be a privileged position as there are babies and children who die without such time and opportunity.

Messengers can be easily misinterpreted, misunderstood, or considered to be empty fluffy claims that have no evidence.

I suppose God could be far less than omnipotent. Life is a teacher for sure though. Existence has much to teach us about how senseless catastrophies happen that don't give much time and opportunity for much of the living population.

Some of us have the luxury to ponder such ultimate questions with rose colored glasses, messengers or privileged position.

I tend to the conviction that life on Earth is grossly unfair to a vast many of people. Now how any God fits into this reality is beyond me.

 

[Trailblazer]

This would be the most plausible way a God would hint us as to God's existence. Although there are tragic circumstances in life for many that afford little opportunity to discover anything of a grande meaning from God. It would still be a privileged position as there are babies and children who die without such time and opportunity.

It is not plausible because God does not do it and the reason God does not do it is because God chooses not to do it.
What we see is what we get. Who are we to question God and how He operates?

Messengers can be easily misinterpreted, misunderstood, or considered to be empty fluffy claims that have no evidence.

What makes you think that any human would not misinterpret and misunderstand a message from God?
How would any human even know the message was from God and not an auditory hallucination?
Nobody could ever know it was from God.

I suppose God could be far less than omnipotent. Life is a teacher for sure though. Existence has much to teach us about how senseless catastrophies happen that don't give much time and opportunity for much of the living population.

So God is less than omnipotent because He does not operate the way atheists want Him to operate?
Any God that took orders from humans would not be omnipotent and the reason is obvious.

Some of us have the luxury to ponder such ultimate questions with rose colored glasses, messengers or privileged position.

I tend to the conviction that life on Earth is grossly unfair to a vast many of people. Now how any God fits into this reality is beyond me.

I fully agree that life on Earth is grossly unfair to a vast many of people and how any God fits into this reality is beyond me.

 

[osgart]

What we see is what we get. Who are we to question God and how He operates?

We are the ones who have to live this life. God doesn't live this life.

We are the ones who desperately seek God's existence.

We are the ones who seek the benefit and/or necessity of knowing God whatsoever.

 

[Trailblazer]

We are the ones who have to live this life. God doesn't live this life.

We are the ones who desperately seek God's existence.

We are the ones who seek the benefit and/or necessity of knowing God whatsoever.

That is all true, but my question still stands: Who are we to question God and how He operates?

If God is All-Knowing and All-Wise then we have to assume that God knows what He is doing.
If God is not All-Knowing and All-Wise then why even bother to believe in His existence?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is all true, but my question still stands: Who are we to question God and how He operates?

You're begging the question.

Until you establish that God is real and that the purported messenger really is delivering God's message, it isn't a matter of questioning God; it's a matter of questioning some guy who claims to speak for God.

If God is All-Knowing and All-Wise then we have to assume that God knows what He is doing.
If God is not All-Knowing and All-Wise then why even bother to believe in His existence?

I would personally step back a moment, ditch all the assumptions and ask yourself that question: "why even bother to believe in his existence?"

 

[Father Heathen]

Everyone has the opportunity to know what God wants them to know.
If they don't know it that is because they reject God's Messengers.

But anyone can claim to be a messenger of God. There are hundreds of religions along with thousands of variations thereof, all claiming to represent God's word and will. How can you be sure that you've accepted the right ones and rejected the wrong ones? Keep in mind most belong to their religion because they were born into it.