How do Baha’is see atheists?

[mikkel_the_dane]

That is so illogical I can barely breathe.

If God can do anything then God can write it himself. God can't need anybody's help, because God is all powerful.

 

[Trailblazer]

If God can do anything then God can write it himself. God can't need anybody's help, because God is all powerful.

All-Powerful does not mean 'can do anything.' It means God has all power to do anything that is within His nature to do.
God is not a man so God cannot write with a pen and ink.
God willed Baha'u'llah to write for Him with a pen and ink.

Exhibition of Baha’u’llah’s writings opens at British Museum | BWNS

Baha’u’llah’s original writings and certain items associated with His life are on display at the British Museum until January 2018.

news.bahai.org

 

[Kfox]

God would still need a Messenger to write scriptures in order to communicate all God had to say.

Again; all of God’s words will be recorded by every recording device world wide. Recording devices will give an objective account of his words; no messenger necessary.

Are you saying that you would have the free will to decide whether to believe it, once you had the needed information?

Yes.

The right information is out there, they just have to find it. Not everyone is going to find it, and of those who find it, not everyone is going to believe it. It would be the same if God spoke from the clouds. Not everyone would believe it was actually God speaking.

The right information is out there, they just have to find it. Not everyone is going to find it, and of those who find it, not everyone is going to believe it. It would be the same if God spoke from the clouds. Not everyone would believe it was actually God speaking.
You just admitted not everybody is going to find the right information via messenger. Speaking from the clouds, EVERYBODY will receive the message.

Even it could be confirmed to be not a human hoax, it could never be confirmed that it was God.

When you say God, you mean YOUR God right? Assuming the voice IS the true God, depending on the message; I suspect many die-hard followers of false Gods will reject the real God and cling to their fake one. Do you agree?

I disagree that we would have more information than we have now. Even if it was God speaking, we would have less information, because God would have to speak for 40 years to reveal what Baha'u'llah wrote.

Are you telling me your God cannot figure out a way to get his message across without talking for 40 years straight? If so, why do you call him God?

Yes, I can agree that at least that many people who claimed to be messengers of God are deceptive liars or they are just deluded,

So why doesn’t God just get rid of the Messenger/Prophet idea since they have credibility issues, and give the message himself?

They believe that God is different from what I believe God is since they have a different religion. There are many religions but that doesn't mean there is a different God for each religion, it only means that God was described differently in different religions.

I disagree. I believe what they are describing is a completely different God. Does your God have a son? If not, then there are a whole lot of people worshipping a completely different God than the one you worship.

 

[CG Didymus]

Then God is not all powerful.

Until their prophet, the person who took the title of Baha'u'llah, there was no manifestation/messenger that wrote down what God had told them. Why would an all-knowing God do that? Did he want the message to get distorted and misinterpreted? Apparently. So, their God might be all-powerful, just not too smart.

 

[Trailblazer]

Again; all of God’s words will be recorded by every recording device world wide. Recording devices will give an objective account of his words; no messenger necessary.

This is so silly, because there is NO WAY you could ever know that came from God, not any more than you can know that a Messenger came from God.
The things that atheists will 'try to do' to get out of recognizing a Messenger never cease to amaze me.
I will never understand the big problem that atheists have with Messengers of God.

The right information is out there, they just have to find it. Not everyone is going to find it, and of those who find it, not everyone is going to believe it. It would be the same if God spoke from the clouds. Not everyone would believe it was actually God speaking.
You just admitted not everybody is going to find the right information via messenger. Speaking from the clouds, EVERYBODY will receive the message.

I guess you mean that nobody would have a choice but to hear it coming from the clouds because the Voice of God would be booming over their head, so EVERYBODY will receive the message?
That is exactly what God does NOT WANT. God does not want to be obvious. God wants everyone to search and find Him on their own.
YOU WANT God to be obvious but guess who is in charge of this operation? It's God, not you.

When you say God, you mean YOUR God right? Assuming the voice IS the true God, depending on the message; I suspect many die-hard followers of false Gods will reject the real God and cling to their fake one. Do you agree?

Yes, I agree that if the one true God spoke from the clouds, many die-hard followers of false Gods would reject the true God and cling to their fake one. Oh, the beauty of free will!

Are you telling me your God cannot figure out a way to get his message across without talking for 40 years straight? If so, why do you call him God?

No, I did not say that. God desired to do it this way and that is why God did it this way.

Jesus' ministry was only three years. God revealed His message to Baha'u'llah not talking straight for 40 years, but over a period of 40 years. It was 40 years since the message was so extensive, compared to the message of Jesus.

Why do I call Him God? Because God is All-Powerful, which means that God ONLY does what He desires to do, not what humans want Him to do. This short prayer sums it up.

I adjure Thee by Thy might, O my God! Let no harm beset me in times of tests, and in moments of heedlessness guide my steps aright through Thine inspiration. Thou art God, potent art Thou to do what Thou desirest. No one can withstand Thy Will or thwart Thy Purpose.​

The Bab​

I adjure Thee by Thy might, O my God!

Baha'i Prayers (English): I adjure Thee by Thy might, O my God! Let no harm beset me in times of tests, and in moments of heedlessness guide my steps aright...

www.bahaiprayers.org

"Potent art Thou to do what Thou desirest." That is why I call Him God. In other words, God has all the power to do what He desires to do.

So why doesn’t God just get rid of the Messenger/Prophet idea since they have credibility issues, and give the message himself?

God does not CARE about credibility issues because God does not need to be believed since God has no needs. It is the humans who have issues with credibility since they are the ones who need to believe.

I disagree. I believe what they are describing is a completely different God. Does your God have a son? If not, then there are a whole lot of people worshipping a completely different God than the one you worship.

Yes, they are describing God differently, and they might even 'believe' that they are worshipping a different God, but that does not mean there is a different God.

No, God does not have a son, only humans have sons. Baha'is believe that Jesus was the Son of God, but only in a metaphorical sense, since Jesus was in relationship to God as a son is to a father.

 

[Trailblazer]

Until their prophet, the person who took the title of Baha'u'llah, there was no manifestation/messenger that wrote down what God had told them. Why would an all-knowing God do that? Did he want the message to get distorted and misinterpreted? Apparently. So, their God might be all-powerful, just not too smart.

or maybe God did not care if the the message got distorted and misinterpreted since He knew it would get straightened out later...
BTW, welcome back from wherever you went, probably on a vacation, something I never get. Now you have a lot of catching up to do.

 

[CG Didymus]

As a Baha’i I try and avoid classifying people by their mindsets, beliefs or attitudes. We humans are all the leaves of one tree and the waves of one sea is my belief. So to me it doesn’t matter what you think or believe because you are my human family regardless and our beliefs should not separate us or cause us to see each other as strangers. It’s ok to discuss or debate the ‘topic’ but the individual is always a fellow human being no matter what they understand or think. And we have no right to judge others or be self righteous and think we know more or better. We all can learn and share from each other.

Is that really how Baha'is are supposed to be? Not to classify people? How many Baha'is are actually able to do that? And it really doesn't matter what others think or understand? And "we" have no right to judge others? Yet, I think most all people do. And Baha'is don't think they know more or know better than others? Where are those Baha'is? I have yet to meet one. Now if you say those things are your goal, and it is how a Baha'i should be, then that's different.

 

[Kfox]

This is so silly, because there is NO WAY you could ever know that came from God, not any more than you can know that a Messenger came from God.

I disagree. People have a long history of deceiving people by claiming they are messengers of God; even YOU admitted to this in your rejection of 99% of the people making such a claim. There has never been a case where an alien has attempted to deceive people this way.

The things that atheists will 'try to do' to get out of recognizing a Messenger never cease to amaze me.
I will never understand the big problem that atheists have with Messengers of God.

Due to history, there is a huge credibility problem

I guess you mean that nobody would have a choice but to hear it coming from the clouds because the Voice of God would be booming over their head, so EVERYBODY will receive the message?
That is exactly what God does NOT WANT. God does not want to be obvious. God wants everyone to search and find Him on their own.
YOU WANT God to be obvious but guess who is in charge of this operation? It's God, not you.

Either that, or your idea of God does not exist; but you believe he does and will go to no limit in trying to justify why his existence isn’t as obvious as it should be.

God does not CARE about credibility issues because God does not need to be believed since God has no needs. It is the humans who have issues with credibility since they are the ones who need to believe.

As a human here; I have no reason to believe, and my life is just fine thank-you.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I see the Baha'i religion as being very dependent on this "messenger" idea.

That was the sole idea that Bahaollah had to sell. The rest was ad-script.

This is so silly, because there is NO WAY you could ever know that came from God, not any more than you can know that a Messenger came from God.

What is silly here that you believe and you want others to believe (for whatever reason, I always wonder if Bahai evangelism is paid for), that a messenger came from God, when you admit that there is NO WAY to know whether it is true or false.

or maybe God did not care if the the message got distorted and misinterpreted since He knew it would get straightened out later...

It happened exactly that way because immediately after Bahaollah, God had to send a Mahdi, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, to correct where Bahaollah failed.

 

[F1fan]

That is not what has happened because it is not progress.

Not to Baha'i and other backward Abrahamics that focus on the past.

There is going to be no theocratic rule by the Baha'i Faith.
You might want to check out this thread on Reddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bahai/comments/142ae60
From one of the posts:
"An important principle is that we cannot impose the Baha'i Faith on others or compel belief. Therefore, even in a majority Baha'is society, some laws of the Faith that are not civil laws would not be applied and the application of any civil laws would have to respect the culture of the place. The Universal of House of Justice has said this multiple times."

The Baha'i institutions do not 'do anything' to gays or anyone who has sex while not married. Whether or not individual Baha'is follow those laws or not is between them and God.

Frankly this sounds like a sales pitch. Of course they claim they will act like angels, until they gain power. We can't see any basis to trust theocracies given the pattern of behavior that makes up history. Why still have this prohibition if the Baha'i theocracy won't enforce it?

Wherever any sex laws are concerned, the present state of society is not progress, it is retrogression. The Baha'i sex laws are progress.

So sayeth you. You making this statment suggests what I fear of a Baha'i theocracy, strict law, no compromise.

The rest of the civilized world that can have sex without being married gets along just fine.

The Baha'i Faith does not claim to have authority over anyone.

They have none. If they did, I would not trust them to be just, fair, and moral.

I already told you what it means, it means men having sex with boys.

I don't see any evidence of this. There is evidence of anti-gay bigotry.

I do not know who they were but nobody was stoned to death. That's biblical, and those days are over.

Sorry, byt Muslims still stone people. There are videos. I have seen a part of one that was on a website that hadn't banned it. It is sick. It is the same commitment to old laws like those you still defend.

The social environment that Baha'u'llah grew up in has nothing to do with His revelation. Baha'u'llah came to challenge and change the societal standards and practices of Islam and that is why He was persecuted by the Muslims in power.

Does it matter? His writings are not very good, his advice is weak, and it all depends on accepting a set of assumptions that have no evidence, like him being a messenger for God. And he writes laws that are bigoted.

 

[Trailblazer]

I disagree. People have a long history of deceiving people by claiming they are messengers of God; even YOU admitted to this in your rejection of 99% of the people making such a claim. There has never been a case where an alien has attempted to deceive people this way.

So what? That still does not address my point. If a voice spoke from the clouds, there is NO WAY you could ever know that came from God, not any more than you can know that a Messenger came from God.

Due to history, there is a huge credibility problem

I understand that, but why can't you leave history where it belongs, in the past?
This s a new age and a new Day of God, and the past is gone.

Either that, or your idea of God does not exist;

That is a logical possibility and it was in my OP, option #3.
3. God does not exist (atheist)

but you believe he does and will go to no limit in trying to justify why his existence isn’t as obvious as it should be.

Why, if God exists, should it be obvious that God exists, just because YOU WANT it to be obvious?
If God exists and does not want it to be obvious it will not be obvious.
It makes no logical sense that if God exists it would be obvious, since if God exists God could make it obvious, yet God doesn't make it obvious.

So your only options are #2 or #3.
2. God exists and doesn’t communicate to humans (deist), or
3. God does not exist (atheist)

As a human here; I have no reason to believe, and my life is just fine thank-you.

If this life is all there is you might not have a reason to believe, but I don't believe that is the case.
I believe this life is fleeting, just a very small part of our total existence.

 

[Trailblazer]

What is silly here that you believe and you want others to believe (for whatever reason, I always wonder if Bahai evangelism is paid for), that a messenger came from God, when you admit that there is NO WAY to know whether it is true or false.

I could not care less if other people believe in Messengers of God as I am only responsible for my own beliefs.

It happened exactly that way because immediately after Bahaollah, God had to send a Mahdi, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, to correct where Bahaollah failed.

I never heard anything more absurd. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a false prophet, hands down, and I would not want to have his fate.

“Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor. We pray God that He may graciously assist him to retract and repudiate such claim. Should he repent, God will, no doubt, forgive him. If, however, he persisteth in his error, God will, assuredly, send down one who will deal mercilessly with him. Terrible, indeed, is God in punishing!”​

The Kitáb-i-Aqdas, p. 32​

 

[Trailblazer]

Frankly this sounds like a sales pitch.

No, it was just a person who had genuine questions and concerns for the Baha'is on that forum. I don't know if it was a Baha'i asking or not.

Of course they claim they will act like angels, until they gain power. We can't see any basis to trust theocracies given the pattern of behavior that makes up history. Why still have this prohibition if the Baha'i theocracy won't enforce it?

Why surmise about the future? Nobody except God knows what the future holds.
History doesn't always repeat itself. This is a new age the likes of which has never been before so it will not be the same as past ages.

So sayeth you. You making this statment suggests what I fear of a Baha'i theocracy, strict law, no compromise.

Sex out of wedlock laws cannot be enforced and the only laws I think will be enforced are adultery, since that can be known. There will be a fine for that.

The rest of the civilized world that can have sex without being married gets along just fine.

There is nothing fine about it, it is just accepted in this decadent society. Sex out of wedlock is the cause of a multitude of societal problems.

Sorry, byt Muslims still stone people. There are videos. I have seen a part of one that was on a website that hadn't banned it. It is sick. It is the same commitment to old laws like those you still defend.

So what? Baha'is don't stone people.

Does it matter? His writings are not very good, his advice is weak, and it all depends on accepting a set of assumptions that have no evidence, like him being a messenger for God.

All of what you said is only your personal opinion, it is not factual. We all have opinions.

And he writes laws that are bigoted.

The laws are not bigoted, it is only your personal opinion that they are.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I never heard anything more absurd. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad is a false prophet, hands down, and I would not want to have his fate.

“Whoso layeth claim to a Revelation direct from God, ere the expiration of a full thousand years, such a man is assuredly a lying impostor. We pray God that He may graciously assist him to retract and repudiate such claim. Should he repent, God will, no doubt, forgive him. If, however, he persisteth in his error, God will, assuredly, send down one who will deal mercilessly with him. Terrible, indeed, is God in punishing!”​

The Kitáb-i-Aqdas, p. 32​

Ah, that was the line I had in my mind all the time. That God is MERCILESS, and his punishment is TERRIBLE. So, if one is not a Bahai or does not accept Bahaollah, then this is the type of God that they have to deal with.
Threat OK for 19th Century uneducated and superstitious Iranian Shia Muslims, but not for us in 21st Century.
Why do you consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a false prophet. More people believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad than in Bahaollah (Check Wikipedia for numbers)? And in what way the evidence provided (if any) by Bahaollah is more than what Mirza Ghulam Ahmad provided? Both just made claims.

 

[Kfox]

So what? That still does not address my point. If a voice spoke from the clouds, there is NO WAY you could ever know that came from God, not any more than you can know that a Messenger came from God.

Obviously there is no way to provide proof to everybody’s satisfaction that it is God, my point is a voice coming from the clouds is a lot more convincing than some guy standing on a soapbox claiming to be the messenger of God.

I understand that, but why can't you leave history where it belongs, in the past?

Because there are too many people (myself included) who insist on learning from mistakes of the past.

Why, if God exists, should it be obvious that God exists, just because YOU WANT it to be obvious?

Because I require it to be obvious in order for me to believe. If God doesn’t care if I believe or not, he needs to tell his followers to quit telling me it is in my best interest to believe. If God doesn’t care, I don’t care; leave me alone with your belief.

If this life is all there is you might not have a reason to believe, but I don't believe that is the case.
I believe this life is fleeting, just a very small part of our total existence.

I don’t believe life is fleeting either thus I have no reason to believe.

 

[Trailblazer]

Ah, that was the line I had in my mind all the time. That God is MERCILESS, and his punishment is TERRIBLE. So, if one is not a Bahai or does not accept Bahaollah, then this is the type of God that they have to deal with.

No, God is not going to punish anyone for not believing in Baha'u'llah.

Why do you consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as a false prophet. More people believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad than in Bahaollah (Check Wikipedia for numbers)?

The reason more people believe in Ahmad is because it is an offshoot of Islam and Islam is the second largest religion in the world.

Ahmadi Muslims believe that Ahmad was divinely commissioned as a true reflection of Muhammad's prophethood to establish the unity of God and to remind mankind of their duties towards God and His creation.​

Ahmadiyya - Wikipedia​

Baha'u'llah broke away from Islam so Muslims reject Him.

Why would it matter how many people believe in Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? That has no bearing on what is actually true.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so." Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

The converse of this is that if many or most people do not believe it, it cannot be so, and that is fallacious.

And in what way the evidence provided (if any) by Bahaollah is more than what Mirza Ghulam Ahmad provided? Both just made claims.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad provided no evidence for who he was. He is an outright fraud to tried to steal from Baha'u'llah. It is Baha'u'llah who came to establish the unity of God and to remind mankind of their duties towards God and His creation.

 

[Trailblazer]

Obviously there is no way to provide proof to everybody’s satisfaction that it is God, my point is a voice coming from the clouds is a lot more convincing than some guy standing on a soapbox claiming to be the messenger of God.

A lot more convincing for you.

Because there are too many people (myself included) who insist on learning from mistakes of the past.

We can learn from them but to assume that the same thing is happening in the present is a mistake in itself. It is not logical.

Because I require it to be obvious in order for me to believe.

It is obvious to me that God exists and has Messengers,
So God should make it obvious to you just because that is what you want?

If God doesn’t care if I believe or not, he needs to tell his followers to quit telling me it is in my best interest to believe.

We only tell people what we believe when we get involved in a conversation because we consider that our responsibility.

If God doesn’t care, I don’t care; leave me alone with your belief.

I did not say that God doesn't care. I said that God does not need anyone's belief since God has no needs.
Since God doesn't need anyone's belief God is not going to make it obvious to everyone that He exists.

I don’t believe life is fleeting either thus I have no reason to believe.

This earthly life is fleeting whether you believe in an afterlife or not.

 

[Kfox]

A lot more convincing for you.

Do you agree it is a lot more convincing for most people? If not, explain why.

We can learn from them but to assume that the same thing is happening in the present is a mistake in itself. It is not logical.

I disagree. I find it perfectly reasonable to remain skeptical until objective evidence proves otherwise.

I did not say that God doesn't care. I said that God does not need anyone's belief since God has no needs.
Since God doesn't need anyone's belief God is not going to make it obvious to everyone that He exists.

Either he cares or he doesn’t. If he cares, he should do what he knows will work to convince people; if he doesn’t care, my point stands.

This earthly life is fleeting whether you believe in an afterlife or not.

Am I supposed to just take your word for it? Really???

 

[Trailblazer]

Do you agree it is a lot more convincing for most people? If not, explain why.

No, I do not think that a voice coming from the clouds in the sky saying "I am God" would be more convincing for most people than a Messenger of God, prophet, or whatever you choose to call him. I do not even think most people would be convinced that voice in the sky was coming from God.

Please bear in mind that most people believe in God and the reason they believe is because of one of these individuals. If God's method of revealing His existence was so poor that it did not work to garner the belief of most people in the world then God might have used another method of communication.

84 percent of the world population has a faith.

Because most faiths have a religious Founder or what I call a Messenger that means most people believe in God because of a Messenger. We know that Christians and Muslims believe in a Messenger and they comprise 55% of the world population. It does not matter if you call them a Messenger; they are holy men who founded the religions, so they are intermediaries between God and man. Sure, there are a few believers who believe in God but not a Messenger but that is not the norm. The point is that with no Messengers or holy men very few people would believe in God.

I disagree. I find it perfectly reasonable to remain skeptical until objective evidence proves otherwise.

I did not say you should not remain skeptical. I only suggest you should remain open-minded and by that I do not mean gullible.

Either he cares or he doesn’t. If he cares, he should do what he knows will work to convince people; if he doesn’t care, my point stands.

I cannot speak for God but I think God cares because otherwise God would not send any Messengers.
It is because God cares that He wants people to recognize the Messengers instead of revealing that He exists in some other way, which would not accomplish what God wants to accomplish. God doesn't just want people to know that He exists, God also wants us to have the teachings and laws that the Messengers reveal. What's the point of knowing that God exists if you don't know why you exist, the purpose for which you were created?

Am I supposed to just take your word for it? Really???

I was not asking you to take my word for it that there is an afterlife but you don't have to take my word for it that this life is fleeting.

Fleeting: lasting for a very short time.

What is the meaning of fleeting? - Google Search

www.google.com

Life might feel like it is going to last forever when you are younger, but the older you get and the more loved ones you lose, the more you will realize the transitory nature of this earthly existence. I have lost everyone in my family including my husband. I only have one brother left but he is seven years older than me so he won't be around that much longer.

 

[CG Didymus]

I disagree. People have a long history of deceiving people by claiming they are messengers of God; even YOU admitted to this in your rejection of 99% of the people making such a claim. There has never been a case where an alien has attempted to deceive people this way.

And how do we know the true prophets and messengers, supposedly they said and did things that came true and God, supposedly, did things to back them up.

I've mentioned to Baha'is how Elijah had God send fire from heaven and consume his sacrifice to prove that his God was real to the prophets of Baal. Could a Baha'i get God to do that today?

Then there is Jesus who God, supposedly, raised from the dead and caused people to come out of their graves and the Sun to be darkened. And this God, supposedly, did speak from heaven and said, "This is my beloved Son."

Those things are important for Jews and Christians to believe their prophets and Scriptures are true, but Baha'is don't believe those things really happened. The Baha'i God, although is powerful enough to create the Universe, can't speak, can't touch, can't do anything to prove himself to be real.

So, what are we left with? Judging the Baha'i prophet by the things he said? And some people take his word for it, that he is sent from God, and some of us have read his stuff and, although some of it is alright, we find some of it problematic. And for several years now on the forum, Baha'is have no answer for the things some of us see as being a problem. It's been the same problems and same questions. And, since Baha'is have no answer, then is it that their God has no answer?