Isn't it better to be atheists?

[shmogie]

All I can say is that it makes no sense that there would be more than one God if God is omnipotent and omniscient as I believe, because there would be no need for more than one God like that so it would make no sense to have more than one. Any God that was not omnipotent and omniscient is not worthy of belief and worship; one might just as well believe in and worship a human.


It is never good to guess on things this important. That is why God sends a Messenger with a message, so we won’t have to guess.

However, since you are the king of likelihoods, you might want to ask yourself how likely it is that there is an unjust God like that. It is more likely that you would simply not go to heaven or hell, but somewhere in between, and that you would be able to work your way to heaven eventually.

Since none of us can ever know the Essence of God, we cannot know why it would blow us away if it actually materialized, but that is moot because we are told that the Essence of God cannot materialize, and that is why God manifests Himself in the form of a man that we can get information from; since He is a hybrid, a God-man who has qualities of both God and man He is able to me a mediator between God and man. That makes sense to me and that is why I believe it. Unlike the way most Christians relate to Jesus, I have no emotional attachment to Baha’u’llah. I just believe He brought a message that is valuable for individuals and humanity, so I like the message.

All we know is what is revealed to the Messenger. I think I probably misinterpreted that passage. The main point of that passage is that even if God could reveal Himself in an unequivocal manner God would not want to because then it would be obvious to everyone, so the Godly could not be differentiated from the godly.

“Were the Eternal Essence to manifest all that is latent within Him, were He to shine in the plentitude of His glory, none would be found to question His power or repudiate His truth. Nay, all created things would be so dazzled and thunderstruck by the evidences of His light as to be reduced to utter nothingness. How, then, can the godly be differentiated under such circumstances from the froward?”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 71-72

That passage is related to the following passage:

“If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people.” His purpose, however, is to enable the pure in spirit and the detached in heart to ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean, that thereby they who seek the Beauty of the All-Glorious may be distinguished and separated from the wayward and perverse. Thus hath it been ordained by the all-glorious and resplendent Pen… ”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 71

In that passage, “If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people” means that God could have revealed Himself in some way such that everyone would know He exists. In that passage, “ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean” means using your reason (innate powers) to determine if God exists. God wants everyone to search for Him and determine that He exists by using their own reason. God also wants us to have faith, and that is why God does not offer unequivocal proof of His existence. Those who have faith are rewarded.

I did not mean to imply that you do not have a spiritual nature. All humans have that whether they believe in God or not. I just do not recall having seen this side of you before, because you were so analytical and logical. I am also analytical and logical but I can be spiritual, although I do not normally get emotional about it unless I am really touched by something, like some of the awesome u-tube videos Baha’is make. I am very much affected by visual and audio, and also by certain scriptures.

I guess you mean because you got burned by it before. I have posted to more nonbelievers than believers over the past five years, and most were formerly Christians. So even though I do not have personal experience, I can understand how they feel and why since I listen and psychology is my other hat. There is a lot of prejudice and confirmation bias towards religion because of Christianity.

Just off the cuff, I do not consider religiosity to be the same as spirituality, and I see belief in God as a separate category. I mean one can be religious and not spiritual or they can be spiritual and not religious; they can be spiritual without belief in God or they can believe in God and be spiritual but not religious. I do think that true belief in God carries with it spirituality, although it is not a requirement for spirituality.

An agnostic is just someone who does not know if God/gods exists, and an atheist is someone who believes that no gods exist. This is normally because of lack of evidence, although some agnostics and atheists I know are too angry at the God they used to believe in to even look at any new evidence.

Believers, who make any more out of that than there is, calling atheists immoral, etc. are just ignorant, and these are normally Christians. However, it is refreshing to know that not all Christians are that way, as I have seen on this forum.

There are two Christians on the other forum I still post on and both of them regularly condemn me to hell because I am a Baha’i. There are many atheists and agnostics on that forum, and I always gravitate towards them, because I consider them much more moral than Christians who damn everyone else to hell. I kind of pity them for having those beliefs because I see them as victims of the Church, while at the same time I realize that they are responsible for those beliefs because they have free will.

One man I particularly like is an atheist and a homosexual and one Christian calls him immoral, but when I have confronted him with the fact that most Christians do not adhere to their own religious injunctions not to have sex out of wedlock, he has nothing to say. I consider that hypocrisy and Jesus hated hypocrisy.

A point. Christians shouldn't call anyone immoral. God has determined what is best in how a person should live their life, any person is free to choose otherwise. There very well could be be natural consequences for this choice. Gluttony, according to the Bible is just as wrong as homosexuality. Is God bad because he doesn't want you to gorge yourself to the max on a habitual basis ? Is he just being mean to grossly obese people ? No, because he loves you, he is telling you what is best to avoid the natural consequences of your desires. There are some very interesting statistics from the homosexual community that might indicate some of the natural consequences God is trying to protect them from.

As to why God allows all the evil in the world to run, seemingly unchecked, one must consider the issue in it's full context. You have done an admirable job of explaining the Godness of God and his omnipotence, but there is an added factor as well. All the pain and suffering on this earth exists in the tiniest possible segment of time within eternity. From our limited, ego centric perspective it seems it has been going on for an unimaginable amount of time. in the grand scale of things, it is like driving over the only pebble that exists on a road that goes on forever.

The why, I think is pretty simple. The Bible makes it clear that evil and the resultant brutality and pain exists because of the willful abuse of free will by those who were given this gift. Every manifestation of evil is a result of humans once again making this choice.

The Bible makes it clear that there are many created beings who have this choice who are watching. It gives the most subtle hints that there are created beings inhabiting other planets in the universe that apparently have free will, who haven't abused it yet.

Consequently, on earth God is allowing the result of willful choices for evil to be fully exposed for being the fallacies they are. He will allow the human created, from generation to generation, ever worsening evil to continue. All outside the earth can see and learn the object lesson. See the full fruition of choosing it and practicing it, God will end this object lesson in his own good time and eliminate evil completely from his creation. Those observing it will only think of it in horror, those saved from it will not remember the pain of it, and Gods creation will return to it,s intended state, and God will be vindicated and billions saved by example of the hideous result of the the created turning away from God and choosing they are the god of themselves.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

All I can say is that it makes no sense that there would be more than one God if God is omnipotent and omniscient as I believe, because there would be no need for more than one God like that so it would make no sense to have more than one.

I was talking about what is logically possible. Why can't two exist and both be alike? Why do they need to be omnipotent? How about powerful enough to create universes?

You posted that God wasn't subject to logic (answered below). Here, you're saying that something suggested about gods wouldn't make sense.

Any God that was not omnipotent and omniscient is not worthy of belief and worship; one might just as well believe in and worship a human.

How does that effect what is true and real? Perhaps the universe has a god or gods that are unworthy of worship.

It is never good to guess on things this important. That is why God sends a Messenger with a message, so we won’t have to guess.

That doesn'r eliminate guessing. It adds a second guess. Now I have to decide not only if there is a god, but whether this messenger represents it.

However, since you are the king of likelihoods, you might want to ask yourself how likely it is that there is an unjust God like that.

I have no way to estimate that just as I have no way to estimate if there is any kind of god at all. To say that it is unlikely because I see no evidence of one is also a guess. I know what the limits of knowledge are in these matters, which is why I call myself an agnostic atheist.

I did not mean to imply that you do not have a spiritual nature. All humans have that whether they believe in God or not. I just do not recall having seen this side of you before, because you were so analytical and logical.

I refer to spirituality from time to time, but almost always as a rebuttal to those that claim spirituality for the religious. You don't seem to be guilty of that.

Even in this area, I try to be analytical and logical. The spiritual experience transcends reason and sensory experience alone, but it can be contemplated and dissected after the fact to identify its elements, and to speculate on its origin and function.It's a lot like musical performance, which is a creative and spiritual right-brain exercise as it's happening, but is preceded by intellectual exercises learning music theory (scales, intervals, chords, chord progressions, key signatures, the rules of harmony, etc..) and songs. That's all left-brain stuff - studying.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

An agnostic is just someone who does not know if God/gods exists, and an atheist is someone who believes that no gods exist.

My definition of atheist is different from yours. As you know, I do not believe that no gods exist. Nor that any do exist, which is what makes me agnostic.

But because I have no god belief, I call myself an atheist. If your definition of atheist doesn't include people like me, I think it's too narrow.

some agnostics and atheists I know are too angry at the God they used to believe in to even look at any new evidence.

No atheists are angry at God. I'm just as critical of the god of the Christian Bible as Bob is, but neither of us is angry at any gods. I thought that I loved God when I was a Christian. Eventually, I stopped believing. There was never any anger involved.

God is not SUBJECT to morality because morality is a human quality.

Are you saying that we cannot make moral judgments about the acts and commands attributed to the gods we are told about?

There IS evidence, but if atheists and agnostics did not LOOK at the evidence for God how could they ever believe in God?

What makes you think that we haven't examined and considered what is being offered as evidence for god? You've posted quite a bit of what you consider evidence for God. It doesn't convince me that there is a god. I see the same sun, sky, clouds, trees, hills, and wildlife that you and others see, many of whom call it evidence for a god.

Not to me. It's evidence that those things can and do exist, maybe because of a god, or maybe without the help of a god. Just looking at them doesn't help me know which, and therefore is neither evidence for or against a god.

One thing that drives me the craziest is when they say that God is subject to logic.

Once again, I'm not sure what you mean. God doesn't need to be logical, or we can't apply logic to claims about God?

I'm going to subject the claims made about God to logical scrutiny. If you tell me that He is perfect, but regretted his mistake with mankind and decided to wipe out humanity and repopulate the earth, I'm going to tell you that you just described a logical impossibility, an imperfect perfect God.

If you tell me that this god also killed most of the terrestrial beasts, I'll call it immoral.

And if you tell me that God decided to use the same breeding stock to restore humanity, and ended up with another world of sinners, I'm going to say that that is not thinking befitting a god, and reject the story on that basis.

Baha’is also believe that God is perfectly good but God is also just and God thus has wrath.

Aren't you making a moral judgment about God here? On what basis do you call God good if not by judging God's moral choices?

 

[shmogie]

I was talking about what is logically possible. Why can't two exist and both be alike? Why do they need to be omnipotent? How about powerful enough to create universes?

You posted that God wasn't subject to logic (answered below). Here, you're saying that something suggested about gods wouldn't make sense.



How does that effect what is true and real? Perhaps the universe has a god or gods that are unworthy of worship.



That doesn'r eliminate guessing. It adds a second guess. Now I have to decide not only if there is a god, but whether this messenger represents it.



I have no way to estimate that just as I have no way to estimate if there is any kind of god at all. To say that it is unlikely because I see no evidence of one is also a guess. I know what the limits of knowledge are in these matters, which is why I call myself an agnostic atheist.



I refer to spirituality from time to time, but almost always as a rebuttal to those that claim spirituality for the religious. You don't seem to be guilty of that.

Even in this area, I try to be analytical and logical. The spiritual experience transcends reason and sensory experience alone, but it can be contemplated and dissected after the fact to identify its elements, and to speculate on its origin and function.It's a lot like musical performance, which is a creative and spiritual right-brain exercise as it's happening, but is preceded by intellectual exercises learning music theory (scales, intervals, chords, chord progressions, key signatures, the rules of harmony, etc..) and songs. That's all left-brain stuff - studying.

God is exempt from all the rules of the universe, including the rules of the thought discipline called logic. this discipline isn't " I think this is totally reasonable, therefore it is logical"

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

God is exempt from all the rules of the universe, including the rules of the thought discipline called logic. this discipline isn't " I think this is totally reasonable, therefore it is logical"

When I have asked others in the past in what sense are we created in the image of God, given how little we have in common with Him or He with us - he never had a sister, a migraine, a nasty employer, a failing grade, a tax bill, an embarrassing moment, a bounced check, a flat tire, a haircut, a neighbor, a traffic ticket, etc.. - I am told that we are like Him for being intellectual and moral agents.

Now, on this thread, I am told that God transcends reason and (earlier) moral judgment. Does He differ from us there as well?

By the way, how would anybody know such a thing even if it were true?

 

[Foxic]

When I have asked others in the past in what sense are we created in the image of God, given how little we have in common with Him or He with us - he never had a sister, a migraine, a nasty employer, a failing grade, a tax bill, an embarrassing moment, a bounced check, a flat tire, a haircut, a neighbor, a traffic ticket, etc.. - I am told that we are like Him for being intellectual and moral agents.

Now, on this thread, I am told that God transcends reason and (earlier) moral judgment. Does He differ from us there as well?

By the way, how would anybody know such a thing even if it were true?

"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."

Susan B. Anthony

 

[shmogie]

When I have asked others in the past in what sense are we created in the image of God, given how little we have in common with Him or He with us - he never had a sister, a migraine, a nasty employer, a failing grade, a tax bill, an embarrassing moment, a bounced check, a flat tire, a haircut, a neighbor, a traffic ticket, etc.. - I am told that we are like Him for being intellectual and moral agents.

Now, on this thread, I am told that God transcends reason and (earlier) moral judgment. Does He differ from us there as well?

By the way, how would anybody know such a thing even if it were true?

, He transcends your reason, and mine, He transcends the rules of logic formulated by man. Since he is the creator of morality, and is perfectly moral, you cannot judge him by your perception of morality. Humans want desperately to put God in the same box they are in, so they then compare Him to all others in the box. They want him within the parameters of the box so they can judge him by those parameters. It is a futile and impossible effort.

 

[1213]

No. It is simply a rejection of all the unsupported and non-evidence claims.

So, if I ask from atheist, "does God exist", his answer will be “I don’t know”, which is basically same as agnostic would say?

 

[Trailblazer]

Basically, your statement above boils down to: Might Makes Right.

Might makes Might is my argument... You cannot do anything about what God has ordained.

“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 From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 209

Or in other words? If God Wants To Murder All The Blue-Eyed Babies, He Can, Because He Can.

And silly followers would still call that massacre .... "good"... !!!

Do you see why I reject all god claims yet? The god they present is pure EVIL-- it cannot even measure up to a mamma BEAR, let alone the moral standards of a modern, enlightened humanist.

God is not murdering anyone or DOING anything evil, humans are murdering and doing evil.

 

[Trailblazer]

No. There is not-- if there were actual, genuine, objective evidence?

Three would be no outspoken atheists, for they would be shouted down with the actual evidence...

... which you have had ample opportunity to present, and failed to do so every time.

What theists call "evidence"? Everyone else calls "hearsay" or "gossip" or "feelings" or worse ...

... you keep using the word "evidence" ... but I don't think it means what you think it means...

There is no objective evidence of God, and there never will be because God is immaterial...

Baha'u'llah was the sign of God on earth. There is objective evidence of Baha'u'llah, the Messenger of God come to earth.... You have ample opportunity to evaluate that and determine if you believe that He got a message from God...

“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 Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106

 

[Trailblazer]

A point. Christians shouldn't call anyone immoral. God has determined what is best in how a person should live their life, any person is free to choose otherwise. There very well could be be natural consequences for this choice. Gluttony, according to the Bible is just as wrong as homosexuality. Is God bad because he doesn't want you to gorge yourself to the max on a habitual basis ? Is he just being mean to grossly obese people ? No, because he loves you, he is telling you what is best to avoid the natural consequences of your desires. There are some very interesting statistics from the homosexual community that might indicate some of the natural consequences God is trying to protect them from.

As to why God allows all the evil in the world to run, seemingly unchecked, one must consider the issue in it's full context. You have done an admirable job of explaining the Godness of God and his omnipotence, but there is an added factor as well. All the pain and suffering on this earth exists in the tiniest possible segment of time within eternity. From our limited, ego centric perspective it seems it has been going on for an unimaginable amount of time. in the grand scale of things, it is like driving over the only pebble that exists on a road that goes on forever.

The why, I think is pretty simple. The Bible makes it clear that evil and the resultant brutality and pain exists because of the willful abuse of free will by those who were given this gift. Every manifestation of evil is a result of humans once again making this choice.

The Bible makes it clear that there are many created beings who have this choice who are watching. It gives the most subtle hints that there are created beings inhabiting other planets in the universe that apparently have free will, who haven't abused it yet.

Consequently, on earth God is allowing the result of willful choices for evil to be fully exposed for being the fallacies they are. He will allow the human created, from generation to generation, ever worsening evil to continue. All outside the earth can see and learn the object lesson. See the full fruition of choosing it and practicing it, God will end this object lesson in his own good time and eliminate evil completely from his creation. Those observing it will only think of it in horror, those saved from it will not remember the pain of it, and Gods creation will return to it,s intended state, and God will be vindicated and billions saved by example of the hideous result of the the created turning away from God and choosing they are the god of themselves.

Thanks for sharing. I agree that Christians should not call anyone immoral or say they are going to hell. Nobody should do that. Only God really knows what is in the hearts and minds of people and only God can judge any soul.

That said, we can observe behaviors and say we consider them immoral by our standards which have been revealed in the scriptures, and like you said, God is not telling people these things to be mean, but rather for their own good... God does not need us for anything because God is fully self-sufficient.

“Consider the mercy of God and His gifts. He enjoineth upon you that which shall profit you, though He Himself can well dispense with all creatures.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140

I cannot say I know the mind of God or why God allows evil. The best I can say is that God gave man free will and man is thus allowed to do good or evil. God might sometimes intervene and help good people or prevent evil but we cannot ever know if or when God does so. But most of the time, God allows us to do what we choose to do, and there are consequences for our actions, to ourselves and others...

The only way I can accommodate in my mind all the suffering in the world is to understand as you said that this life is just a pebble that exists on a road that goes on forever, as you said. It is no fun to suffer or see others suffer, and it the uneven distribution of suffering does not always seem fair, but only God can know the ultimate outcome and all the reasons some people suffer more than others. Moreover, most human suffering is caused by humans who make the wrong choices. That does not account for those who are the innocent victims of those choices. All I can say is that I believe there is recompense for them in the life to come, especially infants and children.

Also, the material world is the cause of most of our suffering and attachment to it just causes more suffering.

“You see all around you proofs of the inadequacy of material things—how joy, comfort, peace and consolation are not to be found in the transitory things of the world. Is it not then foolishness to refuse to seek these treasures where they may be found? The doors of the spiritual Kingdom are open to all, and without is absolute darkness.........

Thus, spirituality is the greatest of God’s gifts, and ‘Life Everlasting’ means ‘Turning to God’. May you, one and all, increase daily in spirituality, may you be strengthened in all goodness, may you be helped more and more by the Divine consolation, be made free by the Holy Spirit of God, and may the power of the Heavenly Kingdom live and work among you.”
Paris Talks, pp. 111-112

In my beliefs, the primary purpose of this life is to prepare us for the life to come in the spiritual world. We learn and grow by suffering, so those who suffer most attain the most perfection, like a plant most pruned by the gardener. That is true if they are able to overcome and learn from their suffering rather than becoming bitter and angry. Not all people rise to the occasion and the reasons are various. I believe God takes personal circumstances and endowments into account and those people will be able to learn and grow in the life to come.

I believe we are moving towards the Golden Age of humanity as prophesied in Isaiah 11:6-9 but it is going to take a long time to get there because it is humans who will build the Kingdom of God on earth, not God.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it......”
The Promised Day is Come, p. 116

 

[shmogie]

Thanks for sharing. I agree that Christians should not call anyone immoral or say they are going to hell. Nobody should do that. Only God really knows what is in the hearts and minds of people and only God can judge any soul.

That said, we can observe behaviors and say we consider them immoral by our standards which have been revealed in the scriptures, and like you said, God is not telling people these things to be mean, but rather for their own good... God does not need us for anything because God is fully self-sufficient.

“Consider the mercy of God and His gifts. He enjoineth upon you that which shall profit you, though He Himself can well dispense with all creatures.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 140

I cannot say I know the mind of God or why God allows evil. The best I can say is that God gave man free will and man is thus allowed to do good or evil. God might sometimes intervene and help good people or prevent evil but we cannot ever know if or when God does so. But most of the time, God allows us to do what we choose to do, and there are consequences for our actions, to ourselves and others...

The only way I can accommodate in my mind all the suffering in the world is to understand as you said that this life is just a pebble that exists on a road that goes on forever, as you said. It is no fun to suffer or see others suffer, and it the uneven distribution of suffering does not always seem fair, but only God can know the ultimate outcome and all the reasons some people suffer more than others. Moreover, most human suffering is caused by humans who make the wrong choices. That does not account for those who are the innocent victims of those choices. All I can say is that I believe there is recompense for them in the life to come, especially infants and children.

Also, the material world is the cause of most of our suffering and attachment to it just causes more suffering.

“You see all around you proofs of the inadequacy of material things—how joy, comfort, peace and consolation are not to be found in the transitory things of the world. Is it not then foolishness to refuse to seek these treasures where they may be found? The doors of the spiritual Kingdom are open to all, and without is absolute darkness.........

Thus, spirituality is the greatest of God’s gifts, and ‘Life Everlasting’ means ‘Turning to God’. May you, one and all, increase daily in spirituality, may you be strengthened in all goodness, may you be helped more and more by the Divine consolation, be made free by the Holy Spirit of God, and may the power of the Heavenly Kingdom live and work among you.”
Paris Talks, pp. 111-112

In my beliefs, the primary purpose of this life is to prepare us for the life to come in the spiritual world. We learn and grow by suffering, so those who suffer most attain the most perfection, like a plant most pruned by the gardener. That is true if they are able to overcome and learn from their suffering rather than becoming bitter and angry. Not all people rise to the occasion and the reasons are various. I believe God takes personal circumstances and endowments into account and those people will be able to learn and grow in the life to come.

I believe we are moving towards the Golden Age of humanity as prophesied in Isaiah 11:6-9 but it is going to take a long time to get there because it is humans who will build the Kingdom of God on earth, not God.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it......”
The Promised Day is Come, p. 116

We digress in belief here. There will be no golden age, till evil and evil people are finally destroyed. We believe this will occur at the battle of Armageddon, the very last convulsive strike of evil. Many Christians, since they believe that humans are immortal in one form or another, believe the very first lie recorded in Scripture " you won't die", and they don't believe God when he said disobedience will result in death. He didn't say illusory death, or death of the carcass but life for the person eternally in another form, he said disobey "and you will surely die". They are in error when they believe that in Gods perfect universe, or outside it, there will a place for evil beings, God is not so vindictive that he has a place where they are isolated and punished, some say in eternal torture. If they exist, there is evil. We are promised that there will be no evil, period, in what is to come.

 

[Trailblazer]

We digress in belief here. There will be no golden age, till evil and evil people are finally destroyed. We believe this will occur at the battle of Armageddon, the very last convulsive strike of evil. Many Christians, since they believe that humans are immortal in one form or another, believe the very first lie recorded in Scripture " you won't die", and they don't believe God when he said disobedience will result in death. He didn't say illusory death, or death of the carcass but life for the person eternally in another form, he said disobey "and you will surely die". They are in error when they believe that in Gods perfect universe, or outside it, there will a place for evil beings, God is not so vindictive that he has a place where they are isolated and punished, some say in eternal torture. If they exist, there is evil. We are promised that there will be no evil, period, in what is to come.

Yes, we do differ in our beliefs.

I do not believe in the battle of Armageddon. There is an indication that a major calamity might occur in the future but there is no way to know what will happen or when it will happen. Keep in mind that this excerpt from a longer Tablet was written in the latter half of the 19th century.

“The world is in travail, and its agitation waxeth day by day. Its face is turned towards waywardness and unbelief. Such shall be its plight, that to disclose it now would not be meet and seemly. Its perversity will long continue. And when the appointed hour is come, there shall suddenly appear that which shall cause the limbs of mankind to quake. Then, and only then, will the Divine Standard be unfurled, and the Nightingale of Paradise warble its melody.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 118-119

I believe that when scriptures say dead they are referring to spiritually dead and when they say alive or born again, they are referring to spiritual life. I believe that all souls will continue to exist in the spiritual realm after the physical body dies, where they will take on a spiritual body comprised of spiritual elements that exist in the spiritual realm.

Souls will be at different levels depending upon the spiritual growth they achieved in this world. Heaven and hell are just metaphors for nearness to and distance from God, spiritual life and spiritual death. After death, all souls can continue to progress, not by virtue of their own free will as they were able to progress here, but by the prayers of others and the mercy of God.

Responsible to God for reasonably evil actions, even by those who have not heard of the Prophet

"But the theologians think that the good and evil of things depend upon both reason and law. The chief foundation of the prohibition of murder, theft, treachery, falsehood, hypocrisy and cruelty, is reason. Every intelligent man comprehends that murder, theft, treachery, falsehood, hypocrisy and cruelty are evil and reprehensible; for if you prick a man with a thorn, he will cry out, complain and groan; so it is evident that he will understand that murder according to reason is evil and reprehensible. If he commits a murder, he will be responsible, whether the renown of the Prophet has reached him or not; for it is reason that formulates the reprehensible character of the action. When a man commits this bad action, he will surely be responsible."
('Abdu'l-Bahá, Some Answered Questions, pp. 266-267)

Pilgrim's note re: all souls eventually progress

Question was asked Abdul Baha if any soul was annihilated/ He answered “No, it will be placed in different conditions by God’s Mercy, and will eventually progress.”
(Pilgrim's note?, attributed to 'Abdu'l-Bahá, at barstow ; cf. Tablets of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, p. 550)

Man is Destined by God to Develop Spiritually Through Eternity

"With regard to the soul of man. According to the Bahá'í Teachings the human soul starts with the formation of the human embryo, and continues to develop and pass through endless stages of existence after its separation from the body. Its progress is thus infinite."
(From a letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, December 31, 1937, in Lights of Guidance, no. 680)

We Can Help Every Soul Attain High Station

"Concerning your question whether a soul can receive knowledge of the Truth in the world beyond. Such a knowledge is surely possible, and is but a sign of the loving mercy of the Almighty. We can, through our prayers, help every soul to gradually attain this high station, even if it has failed to reach it in this world. The progress of the soul does not come to an end with death. It rather starts along a new line. Bahá'u'lláh teaches that great and far-reaching possibilities await the soul in the other world. Spiritual progress in that realm is infinite, and no man, while on this earth, can visualize its full power and extent."
(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer, May 22, 1935, in Lights of Guidance, no. 683)

There Are No Earth-Bound Souls

"There are no earth-bound souls. When the souls that are not good die they go entirely away from this earth and so cannot influence anyone. They are spiritually dead. Their thoughts can have influence only when they are alive on the earth... But the good souls are given eternal life and sometimes God permits their thoughts to reach the earth to help the people."
(Attributed to 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Questions answered by 'Abdu'l-Bahá in Akka: Daily Lessons, Received at Akka, 1979 ed., pp. 35-36, in Lights of Guidance, no. 687)

There is No Power Exercised Over People by Evil Souls that Have Passed Away

"There is no power exercised over the people by those evil souls that have passed away. Good is stronger than evil and even when alive they had very little power. How much less have they after they are dead, and besides they are nowhere near this planet."
(Attributed to 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Questions answered by Abdu'l-Bahá in Akka: Daily Lessons, Received at Akka, 1979 ed., pp. 43-44, in Lights of Guidance, no. 688)

Excerpts from: Life after death/soul - Bahai9

 

[Trailblazer]

I was talking about what is logically possible. Why can't two exist and both be alike? Why do they need to be omnipotent? How about powerful enough to create universes?

Yes, that is logically possible.

You posted that God wasn't subject to logic (answered below). Here, you're saying that something suggested about gods wouldn't make sense.

I do not think that God can be analyzed with logic because God is above everything that can be recounted or perceived, since God’s Essence is unknowable, but you can use logic to look at religious beliefs.

How does that effect what is true and real? Perhaps the universe has a god or gods that are unworthy of worship.

If that was true, then there would be no point worshipping such a god or gods so it is a moot point. But how much sense does that make?

That doesn'r eliminate guessing. It adds a second guess. Now I have to decide not only if there is a god, but whether this messenger represents it.

However, it is much easier to determine if the Messenger is real than if the God is real. You do not have to guess if the Baha’u’llah existed, since He is verifiable by recent historical records, and we know a lot about his life. But the further you go back into history the less you can know about the previous Messengers of God. Some people even question if Moses or Jesus existed, for example.

So at least you have something you can read and study, someone who you can verify the existence of. Not so with God. By looking at all the evidence surrounding Baha’u’llah you can try to determine if He was God’s Representative or not. If you read what He said about God you can use your reasoning to decide if it makes sense or not. But with no Messenger, you are flying blind and there is no way to even know what you are looking for in a God/gods; you are completely in the dark, and everything is left to your own imagination. A big part of the assessment is looking at the material world we live in and trying to figure out how this God represented by Baha’u’llah could be accommodated with reason, given what you already know about the world.

Do you understand why it makes a lot more sense to look at the Messenger first, before even trying to determine if there is a God? How could you ever know if there is a God with no evidence at all? Creation alone is not enough evidence because there are other logical possibilities for Creation. It is indirect evidence at best. The Messenger of God is the most direct evidence of God if God actually sent Him for the express purpose of representing Him on earth. To me that is logical.

I never believed in God before I was a Baha’i. It was kind of like I turned on the TV set and it slowly came into focus until I had a picture of what God was like, since Baha’u’llah reflected the Attributes of God... Then the picture became even clearer when I read what He revealed about God’s Will. I was lucky though because I had no preconceptions from the Bible or any other religion, so I did not have to clear that away from my mind. I was starting from scratch.

I have no way to estimate that just as I have no way to estimate if there is any kind of god at all. To say that it is unlikely because I see no evidence of one is also a guess. I know what the limits of knowledge are in these matters, which is why I call myself an agnostic atheist.

No, you have no way of knowing that, and that is why Messengers of God were sent by God, so we could know. That has been God’s Method throughout all eternity, and the reasons why are explained in the Writings of Baha’u’llah, as he reviews history and shows how they are all connected, links in a chain. This is a religion that conforms to reason and there are explanations for everything people have wondered about for millennia. The Bible by contrast is like an unmapped swamp, a Pandora’s Box. That is why Christians are constantly arguing about what it means, (such as on that new thread entitled State of the Dead).

I refer to spirituality from time to time, but almost always as a rebuttal to those that claim spirituality for the religious. You don't seem to be guilty of that.

Even in this area, I try to be analytical and logical. The spiritual experience transcends reason and sensory experience alone, but it can be contemplated and dissected after the fact to identify its elements, and to speculate on its origin and function. It's a lot like musical performance, which is a creative and spiritual right-brain exercise as it's happening, but is preceded by intellectual exercises learning music theory (scales, intervals, chords, chord progressions, key signatures, the rules of harmony, etc..) and songs. That's all left-brain stuff - studying.

That is exactly it; the spiritual experience transcends reason and sensory experience alone since it is transcendent... It is just something you recognize when it happens. Most people associate it with God, but I do not think that God is necessary and I do not believe God is involved on our level, although there is no way to prove that.... It is logically possible.

Any creative activity can be a spiritual experience. I know I often feel it when I am writing, which I do often. I feel like I am transported into another world. Then I walk into the kitchen and I am back down to this world...

 

[Trailblazer]

My definition of atheist is different from yours. As you know, I do not believe that no gods exist. Nor that any do exist, which is what makes me agnostic.

But because I have no god belief, I call myself an atheist. If your definition of atheist doesn't include people like me, I think it's too narrow.

An atheist is someone who does not believe in God/gods, but since you do not believe that no God/gods exist, you are also an agnostic. So what you are is an agnostic atheist. The way I understand an atheist is that they are certain that no God/gods exist. The way I understand an agnostic is that they believe it is possible that God/gods exist, but they (a) cannot say for certain, or (b) do not believe it can ever be proven.

But here is the caveat; most believers who are rational know that God cannot be proven to exist, so in a way they are like an agnostic. A believer who knows that God exists (even though there is no proof) is another kind of believer. A believer who thinks Jesus was God thinks that is proof, so that is yet another category.

No atheists are angry at God. I'm just as critical of the god of the Christian Bible as Bob is, but neither of us is angry at any gods. I thought that I loved God when I was a Christian. Eventually, I stopped believing. There was never any anger involved.

I know, that is what all the atheists on the other forums I have posted on say. They cannot be angry at a god that they do not believe exists... But they are angry at the image of God that is depicted in the Bible or the imaginary god they have created in their mind, the evil god that does not stop all suffering, for example.

I think that is what happened to most nonbelievers who were formerly Christians; they just stopped believing because Christianity or/and the Bible no longer made any sense to them. At a certain point, they rethought what they believed and realized it was not real. I have questioned if they ever really believed in God and most say they did. It is difficult for me to understand how they could go from belief to non-belief, so it seems to me that they must have never really believed in God. But when I asked one of my best friends he said that he really did believe in God and felt kind of insulted that I would imply he didn’t so I learned from that I have to try to understand what people say and not project my feelings onto them...

From my perspective, I cannot understand how anyone who really believed in God could stop believing, but I am a different person with a different religion. This might sound kind of ironic, but I have tried to not believe because I am not always very happy with God and all the hoops I have to jump through for Him, but I cannot not believe. The reason is because I believe in the evidence, namely the Revelation of Baha’u’llah. I have never been angry at Baha’u’llah because I see Him as the mailman delivering the mail for God and God us the one who runs the post office, so the buck stops there.

Believing in God when you do not want to believe in God can be like having to stay married to someone you do not really love because a divorce is impossible, that is the best analogy I can think of. I also feel very guilty because it is like I got this great gift from God and sometimes I want to send it back. But I cannot send it back because I know God exists. Not only would that be foolish, it could be risky.

But I cannot be less than sincere. The way I feel about God is one reason I can understand how a lot of nonbelievers feel. I do not know any other believers who understand how I feel so it can be a lonely place to be. Love God? I cannot really relate to that as a feeling, only as a thought and something to strive for.

They might not be angry at God but some atheists are really angry at religion because of their experience with Christianity. Some atheists who were raised Christians but never believed in God think the whole idea of God is just silly.

Are you saying that we cannot make moral judgments about the acts and commands attributed to the gods we are told about?

You can, but it really does not make logical sense because if God is the lawgiver He is not subject to His own laws. Also, a God is not subject to being moral since God is not a human and cannot use free will to choose between good and evil. That is anthropomorphizing God.

Also, if God is above us, All-Knowing and All-Wise, how can God be subject to what we believe is moral, given no human is All-Knowing or All-Wise?

However, if you believe in no such God, anything goes. That is the value of knowing some of the Attributes of God from a Messenger.

What makes you think that we haven't examined and considered what is being offered as evidence for god? You've posted quite a bit of what you consider evidence for God. It doesn't convince me that there is a god. I see the same sun, sky, clouds, trees, hills, and wildlife that you and others see, many of whom call it evidence for a god.

Not to me. It's evidence that those things can and do exist, maybe because of a god, or maybe without the help of a god. Just looking at them doesn't help me know which, and therefore is neither evidence for or against a god.

As I think I said earlier, I do not consider Creation to be evidence of God because it can be explained in other ways. It is only evidence to people who already believe in God. The evidence God wants us to look at are His Messengers, and once we believe they are from God we will see Creation as a reflection of God because that is what they said.

Once again, I'm not sure what you mean. God doesn't need to be logical, or we can't apply logic to claims about God?

I'm going to subject the claims made about God to logical scrutiny. If you tell me that He is perfect, but regretted his mistake with mankind and decided to wipe out humanity and repopulate the earth, I'm going to tell you that you just described a logical impossibility, an imperfect perfect God.

You can and should subject the claims made about God to logical scrutiny. That is why God created us with the ability to reason. It is a Baha’i belief that we should reject anything that is not in accord with our reason.

You just made a very good point. Why would God say He is perfect and Creation was perfect, and then say oops, I made a mistake and I am going to wipe out humanity, just because some humans messed up using the free will God gave them? How would that even be just for the people who were good? Baha’is do not believe any such thing as God wiping anyone out. We do not believe in original sin either. It is only logical that if there is a God in charge of everything in existence what He does makes sense.

So what I was saying is that God does not have to be logical according to our understanding of logic, because God is above our understanding so cannot be analyzed that way. But what we see in the world needs to be able to be incorporated with a God belief that makes logical sense.

If you tell me that this god also killed most of the terrestrial beasts, I'll call it immoral.

And if you tell me that God decided to use the same breeding stock to restore humanity, and ended up with another world of sinners, I'm going to say that that is not thinking befitting a god, and reject the story on that basis.

I won’t tell you any such thing, because God does not do things like that. Moreover, the only thing we know that God did was creating the natural world, and after that God sent Messengers in every age. What God does in His time off is completely unknowable.

Aren't you making a moral judgment about God here? On what basis do you call God good if not by judging God's moral choices?

No, it is not a moral judgment because I am not saying that God chooses to do good or evil. I am rather describing some of the Attributes of God, saying that God is both good and just. God does choose to be good or just, like humans make do, God just is good and just. Those are Attributes of God.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Might makes Might is my argument... You cannot do anything about what God has ordained.

So. Pure, undistilled evil. Gotcha. Good thing this evil thing of yours doesn't actually exist, then.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

There is no objective evidence of God, and there never will be because God is immaterial...

So you say. Yet...... you cannot offer any evidence for this ... claim, either.

hmmmm....

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

So, if I ask from atheist, "does God exist", his answer will be “I don’t know”, which is basically same as agnostic would say?

I suppose that would depend on the individual atheist.

Since there is no "atheist handbook" or "atheist bible" or even "supreme atheist leader"... you may get different answers.

But all the atheists I speak with, on a regular basis? You'll get "don't know"; many will qualify that with "very unlikely".

Others will add, "no evidence that is convincing to a rational adult" (or similar).

That's the way it's been since religion was invented.

No religion can survive two words: "prove it".

 

[Trailblazer]

So. Pure, undistilled evil. Gotcha. Good thing this evil thing of yours doesn't actually exist, then.

No, just All-Powerful.
Good thing this God exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you say. Yet...... you cannot offer any evidence for this ... claim, either.

hmmmm....

There is evidence, just no proof.

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:
Proof: evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement: