• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Legitimate reasons not to believe in God

F1fan

Veteran Member
They are not arbitrary judgments.
So why is the West mostly Christian? Why are people around Boston MA mostly Catholic? Why are people in southern US states mostly Baptists? Why are Indians Hindu? Why are people in the Middle East mostly Muslim?

Are all these diverse "truths" planned this way by God? Or is it because people born in these regions are more likley to adot the religion that is prevalent?


Religion has many elements, including the environment we are raised in. It is easier for a Christian to believe in "the golden plates" than a Muslim, for example.
There are many factors at play here.
Exactly, you don't see this in the sciences. There is no Asian type of biology or geology. There is only biology and geology, and all are based on facts that anyone can see for themselves. Religion is diverse and the truths they claim are not well evidenced.

You are just using Mormonism to your advantage. Divide and rule. Everybody is wrong. Nobody is right.
That means "your truth" is victorious. "there is no god".
A bad argument indeed.
That is the dilemma for all theists. You have your version of truth and other religions are competitors. None have adequate and compelling evidence that makjes any truer than any other. Mormons think Mormonism is true. Muslims think Islam is true. There is no evidence that will change anyones minds.

There you go. Believers are all irrational, according to you. :)
If I called believers irrational would I be wrong? Feel free to show how believers are rational and factual in their beliefs.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
...

If I called believers irrational would I be wrong? Feel free to show how believers are rational and factual in their beliefs.

No, you wouldn't be wrong nor right. That is without evidence in both cases. As to show rationality, you can't do that because you can't see it. It is a standard in you and it is a different one in me. As for facts, that is dependent on what someone consider facts.

But yes, some believers can't show facts according to your standard, but that doesn't matter, because you can't show that you are right or rational. Neither can I. I just know that.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
No, you wouldn't be wrong nor right. That is without evidence in both cases.
However I utilize the logical default, and i have seen you do as well, and that is treating any claim as untrue until it can be shown to be true, or at least likely true.

As to show rationality, you can't do that because you can't see it. It is a standard in you and it is a different one in me. As for facts, that is dependent on what someone consider facts.
Yet we have rules in language and logic that allows us to discern rational from irrational.

But yes, some believers can't show facts according to your standard, but that doesn't matter, because you can't show that you are right or rational. Neither can I. I just know that.
Yes we can discern rational from irrational. That our discernment is stressful to some theists is a consequence of their thinking, much of which is dictated by evolution and their social learning.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
If there is no evidence for God and God can't be demonstrated or detected, how can anyone be reasonable to believe God exists?
I'm not talking only by scientific means. There has to be a reliable (reasonable) method to conclude God exists. If not, then you admit that believing in God is not reasonable.
God can only be demonstrated and detected by the Messengers who are sent by God for that express purpose.
That is the only method whereby we can ever know that God exists and that is God's Method that has been in place for all of human history. That is a reasonable method, since it is the method God chose to reveal Himself.
To convince the people who don't believe. Doesn't God want people believing in him?
God does want people believing in Him, but not because He convinced them to do so.
God does not want to convince people who don't believe because He wants them to look at His Messengers in order to believe. Most people who believe in God believe because of one of those Messengers.
Well, your logic needs some work. That's not the "only logical conclusion". Sure, it could be possible that he exists and doesn't want to convince me. The other possibility is that God doesn't exist.
To me those two are indistinguishable. By which reliable (reasonable) method can I conclude one or the other?
I meant that if God exists that is the only logical conclusion. The other logical possibility is that God doesn't exist.

The reliable (reasonable) method by which you can conclude one or the other is by looking at the Messenger of God, which would be Baha'u'llah for this age, and giving His claim a fair chance.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You've probably seen me argue previously that the idea of existing outside of time or space is incoherent. Existing means being somewhere at some time. Are gods not said to think and act? Those require the passage of time - from before states to after states. The definition of existing is to occupy time and space and to interact with other existing objects and processes in time and space. Real things do that, and imaginary things do not.
God has always existed so God did not come into existence at a certain 'point' in time. God exists in time, but not in time as we know and measure it in the material world of existence, since God does not exist in the material world, God exists in the spiritual world.

The same applies to space. God does not exist in space as we see, measure, and know it in the material world, since God does not exist in the material world. God exists somewhere in the spiritual world, in His Own High Place, but nobody can EVER know where that is or approach it, since God is unapproachable.

God does think and act, but not like a human thinks and acts, since God is not a human. God has a mind and emotions and a will, but those don't operate like a human mind, emotions or a human will.

From Wikipedia:

While the Baháʼí writings teach of a personal god who is a being with a personality (including the capacity to reason and to feel love), they clearly state that this does not imply a human or physical form.[2] Shoghi Effendi writes:

What is meant by personal God is a God Who is conscious of His creation, Who has a Mind, a Will, a Purpose, and not, as many scientists and materialists believe, an unconscious and determined force operating in the universe. Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms, and does by no means attempt to define the essence of Divinity which is obviously beyond any human comprehension. To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.[15][16]

God in the Baháʼí Faith
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yes we can discern rational from irrational. That our discernment is stressful to some theists is a consequence of their thinking, much of which is dictated by evolution and their social learning.
Theists can discern rational from irrational. That our discernment is stressful to some atheists is a consequence of their thinking, which is dictated by their personal opinions which are derived from what they have learned throughout their lives.
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
If I called believers irrational would I be wrong? Feel free to show how believers are rational and factual in their beliefs.

I was a devout Christian for thirty years, and I read the Bible cover to cover many times during these years. That's not to mention the almost five years I helped my nephew earn his Master of Theological Studies (MTS) degree, during which time we extensively studied and researched the Bible and Christian theology. Now I know the Bible backwards, forwards, and sideways. I'm pretty sure I know the Bible better than most Christians do. However, I'm no longer a Christian for personal reasons. I am now a Wiccan, a polytheist, and a spiritualist. I've devoted a lot of my time to studying Wicca, but I'm not as emotionally attached to it as I was to my Christian faith.

I've kept my new spiritual beliefs at arm's length because of the trauma I experienced while I was a Christian. And, while I can't prove or disprove the existence of any gods (as I said in my post here), I don't believe just for the sake of believing. I diligently studied the Bible and Christian theology when I was a Christian, and I carried this mindset over to my study of Wicca, polytheism, and spiritualism.
 
Last edited:

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
So why is the West mostly Christian? Why are people around Boston MA mostly Catholic? Why are people in southern US states mostly Baptists? Why are Indians Hindu? Why are people in the Middle East mostly Muslim
Your thinking is flawed here. We know that "birds of a feather flock together", and that the way that we are raised has a profound influence on us.
However, only a small minority of these actively seek truth, and studies religion(s).

Religion is diverse and the truths they claim are not well evidenced.
Of course, the study of religion is not just about observation.
A person may be seeking truth, or many other intentions.
A person might have a PhD in religious studies, and be an atheist, for example. Not necessarily because they are not convinced by any of them. It is all about the intention.

That is the dilemma for all theists. You have your version of truth and other religions are competitors..
I don't see it like that.
A person can seek truth, and go through many different beliefs.
Belief is a personal thing, with diverse reasons for our faith.
The hardest thing is to change your denomination due to conviction, and become a minority, and have difficulty in social life and family.
God knows all this. We are only human.

None have adequate and compelling evidence that makjes any truer than any other. Mormons think Mormonism is true. Muslims think Islam is true. There is no evidence that will change anyones minds
Your mind, you mean. :)

If I called believers irrational would I be wrong?
Not entirely.
Some beliefs are irrational, but not all.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Not entirely.
Some beliefs are irrational, but not all.
Indeed, to say that all beliefs are irrational (or rational) is the fallacy of black and white thinking.

What is the black and white fallacy?

Sometimes called the “either-or” fallacy, a false dilemma is a logical fallacy that presents only two options or sides when there are many options or sides. Essentially, a false dilemma presents a “black and white” kind of thinking when there are actually many shades of gray.

False Dilemma Fallacy - Excelsior University OWL
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Yes, some people can 'imagine' that they experience 'God within' but that does not mean that God is actually within them.
Likewise, Christians believe that the Holy Spirit 'lives inside' of them, but Baha'is don't believe that.

How can God be 'within' people when God is 'one and alone' and 'self-subsisting?' This does not make any logical sense.

“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 From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 192
Of course you're right, but I don't mean that literally. The Holy Spirit from God is connected with our soul, and our soul is connected with our body, not "inside" our body. I've seen you dispute with Christians about whether the Holy Spirit lives "inside" them, but that is a trivial distinction, in my opinion. Why argue when it it serves no purpose?
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
You'd be surprised how many times I've seen people who don't have abilities like mine have a personal encounter with spirits and don't even realize it, other than the usual goosebumps on their arms, hair standing on end on their arms and neck, or expressing the feeling that they were being watched but knowing that they were completely alone. What most people, or at least those who aren't mediums or sensitives, don't realize is that there are earthbound human spirits everywhere, and there are non-human spirits (animal spirits, elemental spirits, tree spirits, Djinn, angelic beings, and demonic entities) as well. There are also the shadow people and black-eyed children, but I'm hesitant to include them because parapsychologists and paranormal investigators haven't yet determined the nature of these humanoid beings. I won't go into the plethora of cryptids that have been sighted and reported over the centuries.
I've had one event that some call "supernatural" that I've told you. But I think what the person I responded to means by "supernatural" is an object moving by itself or something like that. It's a matter of definition. Is a spirit living beyond the grave supernatural? I don't think so. Probably, though, I should have mentioned my ghost, but it wouldn't have convinced him of anything, anyway.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Your thinking is flawed here. We know that "birds of a feather flock together", and that the way that we are raised has a profound influence on us.
That is my point. Humans evolved to conform to group and social norms, and this includes conforming to ideas that are immoral and dangerous to others. Most all religions have a history of threats to others and violence. Look at the 9-11 hijackings as an example. All this is a reason not to believe in God, which is what we are discussing.

However, only a small minority of these actively seek truth, and studies religion(s).
I suggest this is primarily non-theists, because what religion offers truth? I meant truth in the sense that it conforms to what we can determine is true and real.


Of course, the study of religion is not just about observation.
A person may be seeking truth, or many other intentions.
A person might have a PhD in religious studies, and be an atheist, for example. Not necessarily because they are not convinced by any of them. It is all about the intention.
That covers a lot of ground. From a liberal Muslim university professor to a true believer who flies a plane full of people into an office building.

I'd be impressed if theists showed a remarkable compassion and wisdom. Even more impressed if it was just the believers one religion. That would tell us something. But as it is, theists don't show this pattern. It is even worse in many believers, as we observed on 9-11-2001. We see on these threads how critical thinkers are more dedicated to what is objectively true, which it truth. There is a skepticiam about religious beliefs for good reasons. This includes the many versions of Gods.

And speaking of Gods and crimes against humanity in the name of God, why is God so absent when these things happen? If ever there was a time for a God to show up, it never does.

I don't see it like that.
A person can seek truth, and go through many different beliefs.
How often does that happen? A person is raised Catholic and that truth doesn't work out for them? We see testimonies by members on this forum how they have tried numerous religions and they don't offer what they seek. Some finally find a truth. But what this tells us is that religions don't offer an objective truth but they do offer many types of meaning for those seeking meaning.

Belief is a personal thing, with diverse reasons for our faith.
Right, anything goes. What works for Jim or Mike might not work for you. It's arbitary and inconsistent.

The hardest thing is to change your denomination due to conviction, and become a minority, and have difficulty in social life and family.
God knows all this. We are only human.
This is an issue of how some people seeking meaning And find it in a religion will eventually assocoiate their identity with the dogma. They can't see themselve indevendently of the ideas and belief, and this is the trap that religion can bring.

Not entirely.
Some beliefs are irrational, but not all.
I didn't say all. I pointed out that religious ideas as a category are not factual, are not based on evdience, so cannot be classified as rational conclusions.

No one coems to a rational conclusion that a God exists via facts. All believers inform us that their belief is due to other motives and reasons. Much of this is evolution and social learning.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
I know that. I also believe in what He says but I cannot believe that God is all-loving....
I do not think God cares if I don't believe that, if He is all-loving. ;)
What is important is recognition of Baha'u'llah and obedience to His Laws, the The Twin Duties

“The first duty prescribed by God for His servants is the recognition of Him Who is the Day Spring of His Revelation and the Fountain of His laws, Who representeth the Godhead in both the Kingdom of His Cause and the world of creation. Whoso achieveth this duty hath attained unto all good; and whoso is deprived thereof, hath gone astray, though he be the author of every righteous deed. It behoveth every one who reacheth this most sublime station, this summit of transcendent glory, to observe every ordinance of Him Who is the Desire of the world. These twin duties are inseparable. Neither is acceptable without the other. Thus hath it been decreed by Him Who is the Source of Divine inspiration.”

Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 330-331

Do you know that all Baha'is don't agree with everything that is in the Writings? I saw a profile of a man on a dating site who is a Baha'i and it says in his profile that he doesn't agree with everything in the Baha'i Faith. People have a right to their own personal opinions.
Quite true, but you know in one way you are being logical when you you don't believe God is all-loving, in another way you are being illogical. You know this is true. There is a conflict inside of you.:confused: Don't think this is an adequate emoji for this. It doesn't quite fit.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Of course you're right, but I don't mean that literally. The Holy Spirit from God is connected with our soul, and our soul is connected with our body, not "inside" our body. I've seen you dispute with Christians about whether the Holy Spirit lives "inside" them, but that is a trivial distinction, in my opinion. Why argue when it it serves no purpose?
I was not arguing about it, I was just pointing it out. Maybe I used to argue about it with Christians but I don't do that anymore.

But I don't think that the distinction is trivial. If it was so trivial, there would not be a whole chapter in Some Answered Questions about it. ;)

25: THE HOLY SPIRIT
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Quite true, but you know in one way you are being logical when you you don't believe God is all-loving, in another way you are being illogical. You know this is true. There is a conflict inside of you.:confused: Don't think this is an adequate emoji for this. It doesn't quite fit.
The only reason there I have a conflict is because it has been shoved down my throat that God is all-loving and it is drop dead obvious to me that God cannot be all-loving given all the suffering in this world, and I do not mean only my own suffering. If it was only my suffering that could be just bad luck. This world is as Abdu'l-Baha said, a Storehouse of Suffering.

Baha'is are so illogical, to believe God is all-loving when God is the one who created the world that is a storehouse of suffering.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
If humans claim I must state my god in my life.

It's not science.

As theists dictate human terms to mass as a present human teaching...who use letter symbols for easier reference and calculus. Build after Alchemy a machine as I'm Mr machine man.

Human man with his machine god. Machine god then uses any type dusts to get what he wants to cause. Mr man machine man. I get energy.

Science hence isn't God as there isn't a thesis.

A human says my god as spirit cannot be known is unnamed and I believe in him.

He him his are exact man human terms.

A human...all of us any baby human has a first father. The first man human ever. He him and his term is now a God recorded man image voice recording any human language as a god father. God now the God father of any baby.

I'm not natural DNA indian yet can say when my native American Indian father talks to me it's is via gods heavens. Using father in the reference.

He is both the eternal being eternal using man humans records in heavens to talk to me. So I'm unconditionally loved as he human lived he knows it all as both eternal teaching why life... and a humans life.

As he once lived. Now father mother non sexual beings can assist us...do and have by half the water life bio memory original humans biology used owned...given to the state attacked heavens. By men of machine science.

Life was split as bio in half our water mass taken to save bio existence.

Half Life lived after death spirit terms recorded as a record then fades. Then you just exist in the eternal form only.

Unless your DNA is exactly expressed again in a new human life the record many lives remains active.

As I nearly died by my DNA life owned my mother saved me. Baby life. Advised my life was it's last lived experience. Message is for my holy mother that I was given.

Why I'm so psychic.

Why God isn't what scientists of Satan occult want it to be as a machines gain an energy wisdom to resource.

Machine man gave water mass in Alchemy terms to control by his command. Heavens is not man of science to control.

He says contact...AI is contact...hence he used it. Attack is an outcome. Proving his machines changed heavens mass that changed bio cell and mind only. He knows he's a human using the machine he built as a human.

He just lies about it being a God as he's allowed to lie.

As Mr machine man said a blown sun makes a hole leaving cold dusts gases as stars.

I wish I could get the star dust resource above. If only I could own it.

Instead dust his star thesis burns above as light fuel. So only the alien gets it. And the alien takes it out into infinity where carbon mass was sucked burning as a stopped ceased metal.

Why God was never named said teaching.
 

AppieB

Active Member
God can only be demonstrated and detected by the Messengers who are sent by God for that express purpose.
That is the only method whereby we can ever know that God exists and that is God's Method that has been in place for all of human history. That is a reasonable method, since it is the method God chose to reveal Himself.

God does want people believing in Him, but not because He convinced them to do so.
God does not want to convince people who don't believe because He wants them to look at His Messengers in order to believe. Most people who believe in God believe because of one of those Messengers.

I meant that if God exists that is the only logical conclusion. The other logical possibility is that God doesn't exist.

The reliable (reasonable) method by which you can conclude one or the other is by looking at the Messenger of God, which would be Baha'u'llah for this age, and giving His claim a fair chance.
Ok, that sounds interesting. I have a few questions:
What is exactly the methodology to demonstrate God exists? Can you demonstrate this method is reliable?
Who are the Messengers and how can they be identified as Messengers?
 

muhammad_isa

Veteran Member
Most all religions have a history of threats to others and violence. Look at the 9-11 hijackings as an example.
That's not religion, that's politics.
Saudi invited the US to set up air base to defend Kuwait against sadam hussein etc.

..what religion offers truth? I meant truth in the sense that it conforms to what we can determine is true and real.
..and your idea is that spiritual truths cannot be ascertained .. only physical ones. That is too black and white. I don't agree with it.

That covers a lot of ground. From a liberal Muslim university professor to a true believer who flies a plane full of people into an office building.
That's nonsense. Evil acts is not the subject here.

There is a skepticiam about religious beliefs for good reasons. This includes the many versions of Gods.
People keep saying that, but it is not difficult to see why.
It would be surprising if each human had perfect intentions and knowledge.
Some people intentionally mislead for worldly reasons, for example.

And speaking of Gods and crimes against humanity in the name of God, why is God so absent when these things happen?
Mmm .. "why does God allow atrocities?"
A huge question.
The nature of this world is a given. It is very often cruel.
To conclude that existence is "coincidental", and has no real significance does not help me to understand why.

This is an issue of how some people seeking meaning And find it in a religion will eventually assocoiate their identity with the dogma..
Mmm .. religion is social as well as containing dogma.

I didn't say all. I pointed out that religious ideas as a category are not factual, are not based on evdience, so cannot be classified as rational conclusions.
Theology is about making rational conclusions. It doesn't always succeed, I would agree.

All believers inform us that their belief is due to other motives and reasons. Much of this is evolution and social learning.
God knows best why some people are more pious than others.
Some people are content with their traditions, whilst others are not.

Some people cannot see any evidence for the existence of God.
Others see plenty. Some actively seek .. others do not.
The spiritual and physical are not equivalent.Each soul/person approaches life in a way they see fit.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Ok, that sounds interesting. I have a few questions:
What is exactly the methodology to demonstrate God exists? Can you demonstrate this method is reliable?
Who are the Messengers and how can they be identified as Messengers?

The neutral answer is that she can't, because someone else can do it differently. But that is not unique to the idea of God. The same applies to the idea of objective reality as to what it really is.

3 positions.
I know objective reality is God
I know objective reality is physical.
I don't know and I don't have to, because that also works in practice.
 
Top