Except that it does.
To be aware of factuality, one requires facts. Not mere beliefs and unsupported claims.
I have facts, lots of facts that surround the Person and the Revelation of Baha'u'llah..
Or otherwise verifiable in whatever way.
In short: there is no evidence.
God is not verifiable because God cannot be observed but I do have evidence that God exists.
The evidence that shows that God exists is the Messenger of God who was observable and knowable as a fact.
Knowledge is demonstrable. And verifiable.
Religious beliefs are neither.
God is not demonstrable or verifiable but we can have knowledge of God through what the Messenger of God reveals about God.
That's not the point.
The point is that anything can be believed on faith.
But not anything can be believed on evidence.
That's true, but there is evidence. Just because the evidence does not prove anything to you that does not make it non-evidence. Evidence is evidence and it will not be evidence regardless of whether people believe it proves God exists.
Case in point:
All the evidence that a man committed a murder will be presented to the jury but everyone on the jury will not necessarily look at that evidence and conclude that the man is guilty. Some jurors might believe the evidence is inadequate to pronounce a guilty verdict.
But regardless of what the jury concludes the evidence is still the evidence.
The important point is that
the man either committed the murder of he did not, regardless of what the jury concludes.
Likewise,
all the evidence that shows that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God can be presented, but not everyone will look at that evidence and conclude that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God.
But regardless of what people conclude the evidence is still the evidence.
The important point is that
Baha'u'llah was either a Messenger of God or not, regardless of what people conclude after looking at the evidence.
You can believe on faith that undetectable graviton pixies are regulating gravity. But you can not believe that on evidence - because there is no evidence.
But there is evidence that God exists.
What this means, is that faith is NOT a pathway to truth.
I agree. There needs to be evidence, not just faith. Anything can be believed on faith.
Sure. Undetectable graviton fairies could be the regulators of gravity. It's not like you can prove otherwise.
But what use does such a statement have? Nothing.
It's entirely meaningless and worthless.
My standard for believing stuff is quite a bit higher then "well, it could be true cause you can't show it to be false".
I said: "Some things that are believed on faith can be true." I was not suggesting that you believe anything on faith. I was just making a logical statement. Do you understand that evidence is not what makes anything true? Something is either true or false. Evidence is just what people want in order to know if something is true or false.
If a man committed a murder and there was no evidence he still committed the murder. If God did not provide any evidence of His existence God would still exist if God exists. Of course God did provide evidence because otherwise God would not have expected anyone to believe that He exists, since that would be unjust to expect people to believe in God with no evidence.
Again, not the point.
The point is that on faith, you can believe anything. True or false.
And that without any way to distinguish true beliefs from false beliefs.
The actual point is that on faith, you can't find out if it's actually true or false.
Again, I was not suggesting that you believe anything on faith. I was just making a logical statement.
There is a way to distinguish true from false, by using your rational mind, your innate intelligence.
And to find out which it is, one requires evidence and a way to test the belief against observable reality.
Which is a thing religious claims completely fail in.
No, beliefs cannot be tested like scientific facts. In order to know if they are true or not you have to independently investigate the religion and verify for yourself if it is true or false. There is no other way. God created everyone with the
capacity to recognize the signs of God and believe He exists
“I have perfected in every one of you My creation, so that the excellence of My handiwork may be fully revealed unto men. It follows, therefore, that every man hath been, and will continue to be, able of himself to appreciate the Beauty of God, the Glorified. Had he not been endowed with such a capacity, how could he be called to account for his failure?”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 143
“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, pp. 105-106
You require faith, because you have no evidence.
No, I require evidence but I also require faith that God exists and sends Messengers since that cannot be proven.
Undetectable graviton pixies can only be believed on faith. It can't be believed on evidence.
General relativity can be believed on evidence. And thus does not require any "faith".
The point. You keep missing it.
Faith is not a pathway to truth.
Faith is gullibility. It's what you need to believe something which you hope to be true - and have no way to find out if it actually is true.
I am not 'missing' anything because
I never said that faith is a pathway to truth, so that is a straw man.
Faith is required for anything that cannot absolutely be proven. This not only applies to religious beliefs.
But we also want evidence because faith alone is not enough to base anything upon.
