Nothing lasts forever in this life

[KWED]

Those who keep an 'open mind' will not require objective evidence for what can never be verified, they will accept the evidence that is available.

Those with an open mind and rational thought will not claim certainty about something that can never be verified. That is logic 101.

It is those who are rigid and do not have an open mind who require objective evidence for everything, even when such evidence is not logically possible to procure.

It is those who insist they are right about something even when it cannot be verified, and refuse to meet people halfway who are close-minded.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Those with an open mind and rational thought will not claim certainty about something that can never be verified. That is logic 101.

It is those who insist they are right about something even when it cannot be verified, and refuse to meet people halfway who are close-minded.

Believers hold a belief that what they believe is right for them. A BELIEF.

 

[KWED]

The only thing that has been established is that @Trailblazer and @Seeker of White Light do not expect anything from anyone because we don't care what you believe or disbelieve. It is you who is obsessed with what we believe.

You are constantly posting on a religious debate forum, making claims of absolute certainty and arguing with those you disagree with, so you clearly do care about what other people think about this.
However, I am intrigued by what goes on in your head. The cognitive dissonance, confusion, contradictions, denial, etc is fascinating. It is not the belief itself so much as how you attempt to justify it that keeps me coming back.

 

[KWED]

No, and that is the problem, people taking what we say, thinking they know what we meant, and creating a strawman.

And yet, I copy & pasted that quote from @Seeker of White Light's post, so he clearly and demonstrably did say it.
This is what I was just talking about. The complete lack of rationality or honesty when attempting to justify your position.

What some atheists such as @KWED totally miss is that NONE of this is about who is right and who is wrong.

You and Seeker were the one who brought up the issue of "being right and wrong", etc. You were the ones who accused others. Now it has been shown that ironically it is you two who are inflexible in your certainty, you suddenly want to stop taking about it.

[quoteIt is all about what we believe, which can never be proven right or wrong. When people make the discussion about who is right and who is wrong that is ego and the need to be right.[/QUOTE] So, do you accept that your belief about Bahaullah might be wrong, or do you insist that it is right?

 

[Spirit of Light]

And yet, I copy & pasted that quote from @Seeker of White Light's post, so he clearly and demonstrably did say it.
This is what I was just talking about. The complete lack of rationality or honesty when attempting to justify your position.

You and Seeker were the one who brought up the issue of "being right and wrong", etc. You were the ones who accused others. Now it has been shown that ironically it is you two who are inflexible in your certainty, you suddenly want to stop taking about it.

[quoteIt is all about what we believe, which can never be proven right or wrong. When people make the discussion about who is right and who is wrong that is ego and the need to be right.

So, do you accept that your belief about Bahaullah might be wrong, or do you insist that it is right?[/QUOTE]
It is right for us who believe in the teaching

 

[KWED]

@Trailblazer and I can not change other people's belief or non belief both of us Will present Baha'i a bit different because our understanding of the teaching is different but we both believe in the same teaching and founders of the faith.

How about you?
Do you accept the possibility that Bahaullah might have been delusional or dishonest, or do you insist that you are right about him being an actual messenger of an actual god?
I accept all three possibilities.
How open-minded and free of ego are you?

 

[Spirit of Light]

How about you?
Do you accept the possibility that Bahaullah might have been delusional or dishonest, or do you insist that you are right about him being an actual messenger of an actual god?
I accept all three possibilities.
How open-minded and free of ego are you?

I believe in the teaching of Baha'u'llah

 

[KWED]

I do not have to 'make' anyone look bad. They make themselves look bad by the way they behave.

Careful with that irony, it burns!

 

[KWED]

applies to Baha'u'llah only.

Yes. And you have to accept what Bahaullah said, because that's what Bahaullah said.

 

[KWED]

If others do not believe what I believe that is not an issue for me. Holding a personal belief in a spiritual teaching is a path inward to become a better human being.
I don't have to fight others who believe different than I do.

But you are on here, repeatedly making personal attacks on me because I challenge the nature of your beliefs. You also supported me meeting Bahais halfway, yet you refuse to meet me halfway when I make the offer.
Is that all part of being "a better human being"?

 

[Spirit of Light]

But you are on here, repeatedly making personal attacks on me because I challenge the nature of your beliefs. You also supported me meeting Bahais halfway, yet you refuse to meet me halfway when I make the offer.
Is that all part of being "a better human being"?

I do not make personal attack at you, I disagree in your approach to getting answers from believers.
Why would i step away from my belief just to make an atheist happy?

Stepping away from my belief is like stepping away from God.

 

[KWED]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness#:~:text=The hard problem of consciousness,integrate information, and so forth.

The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of explaining why and how humans have qualia[note 1] or phenomenal experiences.[2] This is in contrast to the "easy problems" of explaining the physical systems that give us and other animals the ability to discriminate, integrate information, and so forth. These problems are seen as relatively easy because all that is required for their solution is to specify the mechanisms that perform such functions.[3][4] Philosopher David Chalmers writes that even once we have solved all such problems about the brain and experience, the hard problem will still persist.[3]

The existence of a "hard problem" is controversial. It has been accepted by philosophers of mind such as Joseph Levine,[5] Colin McGinn,[6] and Ned Block[7] and cognitive neuroscientists such as Francisco Varela,[8] Giulio Tononi,[9][10] and Christof Koch.[9][10] However, its existence is disputed by philosophers of mind such as Daniel Dennett,[11] Massimo Pigliucci,[12] Thomas Metzinger, Patricia Churchland,[13] and Keith Frankish,[14] and cognitive neuroscientists such as Stanislas Dehaene,[15] Bernard Baars,[16] Anil Seth,[17] and Antonio Damasio.[18]

In more simple terms, the hard problem is why do we have conscious experiences? Of course as you can see there is a dispute about this, but the simple fact that there is no proven theory about why we have conscious experiences. As a Baha'i I believe that is where the soul comes in.

You misunderstand the issues. There is no scientific medical disagreement over the source of consciousness. It is the electro-chemical activity in the brain. The problem is the exact process by which that activity produces such abstract concepts in the mind.

Not to your knowledge, of course.

Not to anyone's knowledge.
Believing something does not make it "knowledge", it is still merely "belief".

An animal spirit, according to the Baha'i Faith, doesn't have all the attributes of God. The soul does.

You still haven't shown that the "soul" exists. It is still an unsupported claim.

The attributes of God include loving-kindness, compassion, mercy, justice, truthfulness, trustworthiness, etc. Potentially we can manifest those attributes, which in Baha'i speak is same as reflect those attributes. But we have a long way to go!

Those are all human qualities. No need for any god.

Yes, but that choice is predetermined according to Baha'i. You are free to disagree.

So why aren't our choices predetermined?
And why does god predetermine animal choices? What's the point?

 

[KWED]

This is how many Christians think. You seem to have acquired their minsdset. There are multiple meanings to the same text.

You misunderstand. I know that there are multiple meaning to all religious scriptures.
My point is why? It makes no sense in the context of an omni-everything god revealing important information to an infallible messenger.
When humans make laws or write instruction manuals, great care is taken to avoid ambiguity and lack of clarity. Why can't god and his messenger achieve the same basic standard?

 

[KWED]

I am following a Messenger of God, not dogma.

Er, they are the same thing.

Dogma: a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church.

Thee you go. That accurately describes the writings of Bahaullah.

What is boils down to is that dogma is defined by fallible men which is always a sect of that religion.

Nonsense. Dogma perfectly describes divine revelation.
"a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true" (OED)

I do think critically, though I don't expect you to believe that. A rule of thumb is that each person thinks the other person of another religion or of a religion in your case in not thinking critically.

Well, let's see...
Do you accept the possibility that Bahaullah might have been merely delusional or dishonest, or are you certain that he can only have been an actual messenger of an actual god?

 

[KWED]

It's not about how "grand" the civilization is, but the moral level of the civilization, and the level of true enlightment.

Bahaism includes homophobia, sexual discrimination and barbaric punishments - so it still has a fair way to go!

 

[KWED]

I understand. All words that people write form sentences that require interpretation on the part of the reader.
You go by what you think people meant by what they said, which is not always what they actually meant.

Only they know what they meant, you don't know. So when they say "I meant X" that is what they meant.

Dear god. This is ridiculous. I'll type this really slowly...
I am not claiming to know what you meant. I specifically said that I didn't.
I am only commenting on what the words you used mean when used in that order.

It has nothing to do about me being right or wrong. It is all about what I believe is true.
Why it matters to you what I believe is what you should be asking yourself. I could not care less what you believe or disbelieve.

Interesting that you resolutely refuse to answer the question. Let's try again...

Do you accept that your belief about Bahaullah being an actual messenger of an actual god might be wrong?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Er, they are the same thing.

Thee you go. That accurately describes the writings of Bahaullah.

Nonsense. Dogma perfectly describes divine revelation.
"a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true" (OED)

Well, let's see...
Do you accept the possibility that Bahaullah might have been merely delusional or dishonest, or are you certain that he can only have been an actual messenger of an actual god?

Who are you to tell someone that what they say is Nonsense?

Bahaism includes homophobia, sexual discrimination and barbaric punishments - so it still has a fair way to go!

Religion should unite all hearts and cause wars and disputes to vanish from the face of the earth, give birth to spirituality, and bring life and light to each heart. If religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred and division, it were better to be without it, and to withdraw from such a religion would be a truly religious act. For it is clear that the purpose of a remedy is to cure; but if the remedy should only aggravate the complaint it had better be left alone. Any religion which is not a cause of love and unity is no religion. All the holy prophets were as doctors to the soul; they gave prescriptions for the healing of mankind; thus any remedy that causes disease does not come from the great and supreme Physician. – Abdu’l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 130.

In the world of humanity we find a great difference; the female sex is treated as though inferior, and is not allowed equal rights and privileges. This condition is due not to nature, but to education. In the Divine Creation there is no such distinction. Neither sex is superior to the other in the sight of God. Why then should one sex assert the inferiority of the other, withholding just rights and privileges as though God had given His authority for such a course of action? If women received the same educational advantages as those of men, the result would demonstrate the equality of capacity of both for scholarship. …Divine Justice demands that the rights of both sexes should be equally respected since neither is superior to the other in the eyes of Heaven. Dignity before God depends, not on sex, but on purity and luminosity of heart. Human virtues belong equally to all! – Abdu’l-Baha, Paris Talks, pp. 161-162.

 

[KWED]

You are there but I am not there. I do not live in a halfway place.

So it is your ego that is preventing you from meeting me halfway.
(Remember that it was you who made that claim originally)

I do not care what is possible, I only care what is actually true.

But you said that god's existence cannot be proven, so you can't know if it is true. You can only believe it.

I know what is true because I have proven it to myself over the course of 52 years.
I have no need to prove it to anyone else.

So you are insisting that you are right, even though you can't prove that you are right, and you were complaining about people who claim they are right.

The flip-floppery continues.

 

[KWED]

Who are you to tell someone that what they say is Nonsense?

Someone who understands what words mean and how they apply to concepts.

Religion should unite all hearts and cause wars and disputes to vanish from the face of the earth, give birth to spirituality, and bring life and light to each heart. If religion becomes a cause of dislike, hatred and division, it were better to be without it, and to withdraw from such a religion would be a truly religious act. For it is clear that the purpose of a remedy is to cure; but if the remedy should only aggravate the complaint it had better be left alone. Any religion which is not a cause of love and unity is no religion. All the holy prophets were as doctors to the soul; they gave prescriptions for the healing of mankind; thus any remedy that causes disease does not come from the great and supreme Physician. – Abdu’l-Baha, Paris Talks, p. 130.

So if Bahaism contains anything that is intolerant, divisive, discriminatory, violent, oppressive, etc - then it s not a good religion and people should withdraw from it. Correct?

In the world of humanity we find a great difference; the female sex is treated as though inferior, and is not allowed equal rights and privileges. This condition is due not to nature, but to education. In the Divine Creation there is no such distinction. Neither sex is superior to the other in the sight of God. Why then should one sex assert the inferiority of the other, withholding just rights and privileges as though God had given His authority for such a course of action? If women received the same educational advantages as those of men, the result would demonstrate the equality of capacity of both for scholarship. …Divine Justice demands that the rights of both sexes should be equally respected since neither is superior to the other in the eyes of Heaven. Dignity before God depends, not on sex, but on purity and luminosity of heart. Human virtues belong equally to all! – Abdu’l-Baha, Paris Talks, pp. 161-162.

So women are allowed to serve on the Universal House of Justice?

 

[KWED]

I do not make personal attack at you, I disagree in your approach to getting answers from believers.

You seem to be displaying some serious double standards here, considering you have accused me of "bullying" simply for challenging Bahai claims - and yet it's fine to make all sorts of comments about me rather than address my arguments.
So typical.

Why would i step away from my belief just to make an atheist happy?

I haven't asked you to step away from you beliefs. I have merely invited you to meet me halfway. You obviously refuse.

Stepping away from my belief is like stepping away from God.

So you categorically reject any possibility other than Bahaullah being an actual messenger of an actual god. You are absolutely certain that your beliefs are right and you will not budge an inch on that. Even though you accept that it cannot be proven.