Questions for Atheists and Agnostics

[Trailblazer]

"The evidence is that God does not prove He exists in any objective way, so that must mean God does not end faith..."

But you said that God has been subjectively proven for you... has your faith ended?

What I meant is that because God cannot be objectively proven (see my previous post to you) there will always be a need for faith. We would not need faith if God was a proven fact.

No, my faith has not ended. I not only have faith that God exists, I have certitude that God exists. I know, but not the way someone would know an objective fact. It is an inner sense of knowing.

 

[Trailblazer]

That doesnt answer my question

How is faith certainty?

Anyone can put their faith in messengers. That doesnt mean the messengers are telling the truth. If you make a statement saying you are certain, you no longer have faith; you know.

How can you be certain the messengers are telling the truth when you said there is no proof (nor description) of him to exist?

If you are certain, demonstrate how we can trust the messengers world beyond faith (for example reason and facts)

One can have certainty because of the evidence and faith in the evidence. Once we have faith (trust) in the evidence we know the Messenger if telling the truth. This is no different than me having faith in my husband and thus knowing he is telling the truth.

I do not need proof that God exists because I have faith (I know) that Baha’u’llah was telling the truth about God.

This is an individual journey. Everyone has to come to faith (knowing) on their own, by looking at the evidence. Not everyone will view the evidence the same way so not all people will have faith (knowing).

How do you discern whether the messengers are telling you facts to which you are certain true without putting knowledge as important in drawing conclusions to your belief system?
What is reason without knowledge?

I trust (have faith in) the Messenger, so I believe He told the truth about God. I get the knowledge of God through Baha’u’llah and I apply my reason to that knowledge.

How can I trust this is true when certainty and reason is not as important as faith?

Reason applied to the evidence that indicates that Baha’u’llah was God’s Representative bestows faith and certainty.

 

[Trailblazer]

If they didn't recognize that he made himself known, then he didn't make himself obvious enough to them. Everyone has a different level of evidence needed to convince them, and an all-knowing god would know what he needed to do to convince everyone of his existence.

Of course God knows what it would take but God is not trying to convince anyone. God wants everyone to convince themselves, by searching for and then looking at the evidence He provides. Anything worth having is worth the effort exerted to get it. God is no exception.

God does not want to be too obvious because that would be too easy.

 

[Trailblazer]

No. I am not aware that requiring belief is a precondition to be qualified as God.

I agree. There is no reason to think that God would want everyone to believe in Him and there is no reason to think an omnipotent God would need anyone to believe in Him.

Show up would be helpful. Talking to believers during those relationship would also help to avoid that people believe in thousands of mutually contradicting different Gods.

He could for instance zap belief in Him in every mind. Free will is overrated.

If God wanted everyone to believe in Him He could surely do something like that, so since God does not do anything like that we can deduce that God does not want everyone to believe in Him.

There are certain problems with zapping belief in Him in every mind, and one problem is that some people do not want to be zapped because they do not want to believe in God. The other problem is that would only accomplish belief, but we would still not know anything about God or what God wants us to do. That is why God uses Messengers, to convey that information to us.

Since I think that omnipotence is a characteristic of God, I see no logical impediment against Him showing up on earth.

True, It would probably be difficult to distinguish Him from a very powerful alien. But it would surely be much more helpful than the nothing we experience of Him here.

True, God could do it, but I am not sure how helpful it would be. According to Baha’u’llah, this is what would happen if God showed up on earth:

“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

 

[Trailblazer]

No, Messengers of God are not making up God. (In YOUR personal opinion) Nobody could make up all that is written in scriptures nor would they have any reason to spend their time doing so. It is not logical to think that all religious scriptures came from mere men and had nothing to do with any god. (In YOUR personal opinion) Surely, some of the Bible was written by men, but the Writings of Baha’u’llah are His own Writings and Hos Writings alone indicate that He was more than a man. Of course that is a belief, but because of all the evidence I have it gives me a good reason to believe it is true. (In YOUR personal opinion).

“Of course, without VERIFIABLE evidence that these 'messengers' didn't just make it all up, you have EXACTLY as much VERIFIABLE evidence for YOUR personal opinion as the atheist has verifiable evidence for HIS personal opinion.

Sorry but no. It is not MY personal opinion, it is a BELIEF shared by about 7 million other people in the world. All my atheist has is his own personal opinion, and he has NO evidence to back it up.

I have verifiable evidence that Baha’u’llah existed and who He was as a person, what He did on his mission, what He wrote, and the religion He established, prophecies that were fulfilled by Him, and predictions He made that came true. By contrast, ALL this atheist has is a personal opinion, with nothing to back it up. It is based upon what he thinks a god would do if it were real, he having NO WAY to know that. I have the entire Holy Bible and the Qur’an and the Writings of Baha’u’llah which back up my believe about who God is and what God did and so I know what God can do and what God cannot do. By contrast, this atheist has jack squat, his vain imaginations about what a god could do and world do if it was real, based upon one attribute of God he pilfered from the Bible – omnipotence – which to him means that god can do anything I want god to do, and on my own schedule. I think you should quit trying to defend his position because it has no leg to stand on.

In short, I have a lot of VERIFIABLE evidence of Baha’u’llah, He has no evidence of any kind.

No, it is not based upon my personal opinion. It is based upon what my religion teaches about the other Messengers. And of course, your PERSONAL OPINION that these particular religious teachings are correct... so it IS based upon your personal opinion. Baha’is believe that Joseph Smith was a Seer. A Seer is an inspired individual who can prophesy, see visions, and receive Revelations but they are not Prophets. I do not even think Smith claimed that He got a revelation from God. He claimed Jesus spoke to him, and that is possible, but Jesus speaking is not the same thing as God speaking. There is also evidence that Smith prophesied the coming of Baha’u’llah. And AGAIN, this is all based on your PERSONAL opinion that Baha'is belief is legitimate.

Regarding:“I STILL don't see how YOUR personal opinion that your religion is correct is any more legitimate than the atheist's personal opinion that HIS beliefs are correct.”

Simply put, I have something to BASE my personal opinion about my beliefs upon; I have evidence. He has NOTHING to base his personal opinion upon except what he calls “the use of reason.” But it is only HIS REASON, and that does not mean it is reasonable in any manner shape or form. There is nothing to check it against; he could be a complete lunatic. By contrast 7 million Baha’is are not all lunatics. This is logic 101 stuff. I am not saying it means the Baha’i Faith is true just because 7 million people believe it; that would be illogical. I am only saying it is more likely to be true than the OPINION of one atheist who has come up with a theory.

Simply put, because there is a lot of evidence that indicates that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God who got a message from God. How could I possibly know more than Him? There is verifiable history that demonstrates that even before He got His revelation from God, Baha’u’llah had innate knowledge, knowledge of things He could never have known if he was not more than an ordinary human being, since He had only a very rudimentary education. For example, He knew more about the Qur’an than the Muslim scholars knew, and they even had to admit that when He presented His arguments to them. How did He know all this, if He was not more than a mere man? I just use my logic to figure things out.
Regarding: “Once again, evidence that is NOT verifiable is pretty much useless.”

All the evidence I have cited is verifiable. The only thing that is NOT verifiable is that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God. Nobody can prove such a thing since we did not GET the revelation. I do not waste my time waiting for verifiable evidence of things that can never BE verified.

Just because YOU have a low threshold for what you'll accept as 'evidence' does NOT mean that it's sufficient evidence for everyone. As I said before, the terrorists on 9/11 convinced themselves that THEY have evidence that god wanted them to murder people, so clearly people can convinced themselves that virtually ANYTHING is evidence for what they want to believe. Until you can provide VERIFIABLE evidence, you are wasting your time trying to convince me that your unverifiable 'evidence' has any worth.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am just responding to posts on a forum.

The only thing that cannot be verified is that Baha’u’llah got a message from God.

And WITHOUT such verification any claims that he IS a messenger of god is EQUALLY as reliable as the claims made up by your atheist.

No, you are wrong about that because Baha’u’llah has a lot of supporting evidence that indicates that He could have been a Messenger of God. By contrast, my atheist has jack squat. My atheist has nothing to BASE his claims upon. That would be like saying that a guy off the street with no education is EQUALLY as reliable to cure cancer as a world renowned cancer specialist. One has evidence to demonstrate that He can do a job, the other doesn’t. You see, Baha’u’llah DID the job, He revealed 15,000 Tablets to humanity, so it does not matter whether we can verify that He actually GOT a message from God. That is either taken on faith (based upon evidence we have about Him) or not.

That fact that you are willing to accept it as true WITHOUT verification simply demonstrates that you have a very low threshold for what you consider to be evidence.

You have your requirements, I have mine. Please do not project YOUR requirements upon me. I do not need verifiable evidence of what I KNOW can never be verified. That is unrealistic so I would be a fool to require that. That would be like me saying I require a private jet to get to work or else I am not going to work.

 

[Sir Doom]

God is not going to tell you who His Messenger is because God does not communicate directly to ordinary humans, only to His chosen Messengers, who then communicate to us. The Messenger tells us what we are able to know about God.

Except that part about speaking to Messengers or ordinary humans. I'm meant to know that intuitively?

 

[Koldo]

Yes, we can all agree on certain things that are best for our well-being but there are other things that are good for our well-being that many people do not even know about.

It makes a huge difference if we believe in God, but in order to know that you would have to know what God revealed through His last Messenger, Baha’u’llah. That is the only way to know God and know what God wants for us.

God does not want to have direct contact with humans and that is one reason God sends Messengers to represent Him and deliver His message.

What difference does it make, in your view ?

No, that is not what I meant. I meant that some people do not care if they believe in God (they can take it or leave it). As you said before “My only criticism here is that I don't really see the point of wanting to believe in God.
As I see it, either one does, or does not.” Did you mean you don’t care or that you don’t know any reasons to believe in God?

I don't.

But let me put it this way: I think it makes sense to want to know whether something is the case. Likewise it also makes sense to want something to be the case. But I don' really see why someone would want to believe something to be the case. I see belief as a mere consequence, not something to be desired in itself.

Putting it in context: One thing is to want to know whether God exists. Another is to want God to exist. And yet another is to want to believe that God exists.

Some people might not even want to believe in God if they could, for various reasons. I knew an atheist who just hated the very idea of God because belief in God might upset her selfish little life she had made for herself. She hated me because I talked about God and what I would sacrifice for God.

That's intriguing. How would it upset her life ?
Did she ever mention it ?

There might be people who wish God did not exist, but probably not many. The reason I sometimes wish God did not exist is because it is not easy doing everything for God and nothing for myself. But I know in the long run I will be better off. The other reason I sometimes wish God did not exist is because God created the material world, and I do not like the material world very much, it causes so much suffering. If God did not exist I would not exist, and sometimes I wish that was the case.

Like I said before, sometimes I want to believe in God and sometimes I don’t, but most of the time I do. If I don’t it is because I get so tired of talking about God on forums, or I see something in the world I do not like, I attribute to God and I do not like God.

The reason I want to believe in God is that I know that God created me to know and love Him. I do okay with knowing God, as much as I am allowed to know, but I do not do so well in loving God. I also know that what God revealed through Baha’u’llah is how God wants me to live my life, so it if beneficial for me and others I come into contact with to follow those teachings and laws. This short quote kind of summarizes how important it is to believe in God and follow His teachings and laws:

“The beginning of all things is the knowledge of God, and the end of all things is strict observance of whatsoever hath been sent down from the empyrean of the Divine Will that pervadeth all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth.”Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 5

It is really pretty awesome once one believes it, but my religion is not for the faint of heart because it entails sacrifice and carries a lot of responsibility, all worth it though.

I am not sure I follow. If you know that God created you, how can you not believe that God exists ?
Or by 'belief in God', do you mean 'belief in what God says/said' ?

 

[ChristineM]

Yes we make our own delusions. The greatest delusion is thinking the material senses are all that we are. Other delusions are spiritualy based. I hope for you that your dreams open that new world to you, for that to happen, the heart must first consider the possibility.

Peace be with you and all.

Unless you modify that with in your opinion or provide evidence that a set of muscles evolved for the sole purpose of pumping blood has the capacity to consider anything i am afraid I'll have to disregard that post as total loopy juice nonsense.

 

[ChristineM]

I cannot validate evidence for other people. They have to read it and validate it for themselves.The medicine was released by Baha’u’llah, the Divine Physician. I do not have to verify its effectiveness. If people want to know about it they can go and read about it. It won’t kill then to do a little reading. It won’t kill them to believe what they read, it will bestow eternal life.

Thanks. It was long and very hot but it is almost over...

I did not say there is no evidence. We have evidence that God does not prove He exists, because if God did prove He exists everyone would believe in God. Because God does not prove He exists in any objective way there will always be a need for faith. We would not need faith if God proved He existed in an objective way. God would be proven fact.

Ok, the moon is made of gorgonzola, sea is a solid mass harder than concrete, RF is only a group dream, there is no such thing as air, bananas are pink and are really space aliens... Etc. See what happens when people can say anything without justification.

If you cant cant justify your claims how do you expect to be taken seriously?

As i said, you consider lack of evidence to be evidence, thats up to you. Im sure it must make things so easy for you.

And talking in circles doesnt help, lets see if i can unscramble what you said

You have evidence there is no evidence because if there were evidence there would be no need for faith.

I think i said that several times already.

 

[Shad]

Messengers of God come to bring moral and spiritual truth, not new technology and medicine. We have science for that. Call it babble of you want to but I for one want to know where my soul is headed after my body dies.

By what criteria do you differentiate between someone telling you something you want to hear as true and what is actually true.

You are correct. That is one reason Baha’u’llah came, to explain that there is only One God and many Messengers, a new Messenger appearing in every new age. He came to get everyone on the same page but the adherents of older religions cling tenaciously to their older religions, which are no longer pertinent to this age in history. The religious dispensations of the past have been abrogated by the Revelation of Baha’u’llah, who brought a new message and new social teachings and laws that are pertinent to this new age.

My point was multiple messengers at the same time with the same message is more convincing than a single person claiming everyone else but him go it wrong. Religions have been doing that for centuries.

That is a good question and it deserves a better answer than I can do justice to:

“It is clear and evident that all men shall, after their physical death, estimate the worth of their deeds, and realize all that their hands have wrought. I swear by the Day Star that shineth above the horizon of Divine power! They that are the followers of the one true God shall, the moment they depart out of this life, experience such joy and gladness as would be impossible to describe, while they that live in error shall be seized with such fear and trembling, and shall be filled with such consternation, as nothing can exceed. Well is it with him that hath quaffed the choice and incorruptible wine of faith through the gracious favor and the manifold bounties of Him Who is the Lord of all Faiths…”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 171
In short, those with a warped moral compass and the warped deeds that resulted from that are going to be in a very bad way.

You have conceded the point as it requires changing the person thus it is questionable if the same person still exists.

I only know what I have been told by people and what other Baha’is tell me, and from that I have concluded that not very many people have investigated the Baha’i Faith before someone told them about it, and even after most people decline. What were the logical errors?

Your cited scripture. X is true because it has not been proven false. That is a fallacy.

As I explained, the goal of the Baha’i Faith is to bring all the religions under one common banner. Unity of mankind is the pivot point around which the religion revolves, but it is unity in diversity, not conformity or uniformity.

Do you think it has been successful in that goal given the low numbers of follower?

I did not see any methods you presented that were realistic. The Writings of Baha’u’llah are incontrovertibly true if He got messages from a God. If not, we can all take our balls and go home.

Do note you use of IF. Again what is the criteria you used to determine God's message from someone telling you what you want to hear.

I do not know anyone who would be serving self by that... All Baha’u’llah got for delivering His message was suffering, imprisonment and banishment from place to place, for 40 years.

So? If I went to KSA and starting preaching a new religion I would be tossed in jail as well. Suffering does not indicate something is true.

Self-serving as in it is easy to claim everyone else is misled but one person and a tiny group of followers.

If it is true that God does not communicate directly to anyone except His chosen Messengers, it is true. If not, we can all take our balls and go home and wait for God to bring us a personal message.

You missed the point. Blaming others for being unconvinced of a religion is easy. It's a copout.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Sorry but no. It is not MY personal opinion, it is a BELIEF shared by about 7 million other people in the world. All my atheist has is his own personal opinion, and he has NO evidence to back it up.

I have verifiable evidence that Baha’u’llah existed and who He was as a person, what He did on his mission, what He wrote, and the religion He established, prophecies that were fulfilled by Him, and predictions He made that came true. By contrast, ALL this atheist has is a personal opinion, with nothing to back it up. It is based upon what he thinks a god would do if it were real, he having NO WAY to know that. I have the entire Holy Bible and the Qur’an and the Writings of Baha’u’llah which back up my believe about who God is and what God did and so I know what God can do and what God cannot do. By contrast, this atheist has jack squat, his vain imaginations about what a god could do and world do if it was real, based upon one attribute of God he pilfered from the Bible – omnipotence – which to him means that god can do anything I want god to do, and on my own schedule. I think you should quit trying to defend his position because it has no leg to stand on.

In short, I have a lot of VERIFIABLE evidence of Baha’u’llah, He has no evidence of any kind.

Simply put, I have something to BASE my personal opinion about my beliefs upon; I have evidence. He has NOTHING to base his personal opinion upon except what he calls “the use of reason.” But it is only HIS REASON, and that does not mean it is reasonable in any manner shape or form. There is nothing to check it against; he could be a complete lunatic. By contrast 7 million Baha’is are not all lunatics. This is logic 101 stuff. I am not saying it means the Baha’i Faith is true just because 7 million people believe it; that would be illogical. I am only saying it is more likely to be true than the OPINION of one atheist who has come up with a theory.

All the evidence I have cited is verifiable. The only thing that is NOT verifiable is that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God. Nobody can prove such a thing since we did not GET the revelation. I do not waste my time waiting for verifiable evidence of things that can never BE verified.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am just responding to posts on a forum.

No, you are wrong about that because Baha’u’llah has a lot of supporting evidence that indicates that He could have been a Messenger of God. By contrast, my atheist has jack squat. My atheist has nothing to BASE his claims upon. That would be like saying that a guy off the street with no education is EQUALLY as reliable to cure cancer as a world renowned cancer specialist. One has evidence to demonstrate that He can do a job, the other doesn’t. You see, Baha’u’llah DID the job, He revealed 15,000 Tablets to humanity, so it does not matter whether we can verify that He actually GOT a message from God.

You have your requirements, I have mine. Please do not project YOUR requirements upon me. I do not need verifiable evidence of what I KNOW can never be verified. That is unrealistic so I would be a fool to require that. That would be like me saying I require a private jet to get to work or else I am not going to work.

It is not MY personal opinion, it is a BELIEF shared by about 7 million other people

LOL Sorry, but that fact that you share a personal belief with 7 million other people doesn't change the reality that it's STILL your PERSONAL BELIEF.

I have verifiable evidence that Baha’u’llah existed and who He was as a person, what He did on his mission, what He wrote, and the religion He established, prophecies that were fulfilled by Him, and predictions He made that came true. By contrast, ALL this atheist has is a personal opinion, with nothing to back it up. It is based upon what he thinks a god would do if it were real, he having NO WAY to know that.

I have VERIFIABLE evidence that some guy named Saint Nicholas actually existed! Of COURSE that doesn't do ANYTHING to establish that all of the mythology that surrounds Santa Claus is actually REAL.

You have your PERSONAL OPINION that Baha'u'llah established prophecies that were fulfilled by him. This atheist has his PERSONAL OPINION as well. The only difference I see is that the atheists claims are based on what HE made up and YOUR claims are based on what OTHER people made up. AGAIN, why is it better to believe OTHER people's made up stories instead of your own?

All the evidence I have cited is verifiable. The only thing that is NOT verifiable is that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God. Nobody can prove such a thing since we did not GET the revelation. I do not waste my time waiting for verifiable evidence of things that can never BE verified.

Yeah, and the ONLY part that matters is whether or not the revelation ACTUALLY came from god. If it can NEVER be verified then there is NEVER a good reason to accept it as true. I do not waste my time accepting fantastical claims that can NOT be verified. Without VERIFICATION it's not worthy of my belief. CLEARLY you do not adhere to such standards and are willing to accept fantastical claims WITHOUT verifiable evidence.

That is either taken on faith (based upon evidence we have about Him) or not.

EXACTLY! You either take it on FAITH, WITHOUT any verifiable evidence that these messages came from god or you QUESTION if they actually came from god BECAUSE there is no verifiable evidence. And since people can have faith in absolutely ANYTHING, it's OBVIOUS that faith is NOT a reliable path to truth. So anyone who relies on 'faith' CLEARLY isn't interested in ACTUAL truth.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Sorry but no. It is not MY personal opinion, it is a BELIEF shared by about 7 million other people in the world. All my atheist has is his own personal opinion, and he has NO evidence to back it up.

I have verifiable evidence that Baha’u’llah existed and who He was as a person, what He did on his mission, what He wrote, and the religion He established, prophecies that were fulfilled by Him, and predictions He made that came true. By contrast, ALL this atheist has is a personal opinion, with nothing to back it up. It is based upon what he thinks a god would do if it were real, he having NO WAY to know that. I have the entire Holy Bible and the Qur’an and the Writings of Baha’u’llah which back up my believe about who God is and what God did and so I know what God can do and what God cannot do. By contrast, this atheist has jack squat, his vain imaginations about what a god could do and world do if it was real, based upon one attribute of God he pilfered from the Bible – omnipotence – which to him means that god can do anything I want god to do, and on my own schedule. I think you should quit trying to defend his position because it has no leg to stand on.

In short, I have a lot of VERIFIABLE evidence of Baha’u’llah, He has no evidence of any kind.

Simply put, I have something to BASE my personal opinion about my beliefs upon; I have evidence. He has NOTHING to base his personal opinion upon except what he calls “the use of reason.” But it is only HIS REASON, and that does not mean it is reasonable in any manner shape or form. There is nothing to check it against; he could be a complete lunatic. By contrast 7 million Baha’is are not all lunatics. This is logic 101 stuff. I am not saying it means the Baha’i Faith is true just because 7 million people believe it; that would be illogical. I am only saying it is more likely to be true than the OPINION of one atheist who has come up with a theory.

All the evidence I have cited is verifiable. The only thing that is NOT verifiable is that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God. Nobody can prove such a thing since we did not GET the revelation. I do not waste my time waiting for verifiable evidence of things that can never BE verified.

I am not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am just responding to posts on a forum.

No, you are wrong about that because Baha’u’llah has a lot of supporting evidence that indicates that He could have been a Messenger of God. By contrast, my atheist has jack squat. My atheist has nothing to BASE his claims upon. That would be like saying that a guy off the street with no education is EQUALLY as reliable to cure cancer as a world renowned cancer specialist. One has evidence to demonstrate that He can do a job, the other doesn’t. You see, Baha’u’llah DID the job, He revealed 15,000 Tablets to humanity, so it does not matter whether we can verify that He actually GOT a message from God. That is either taken on faith (based upon evidence we have about Him) or not.

You have your requirements, I have mine. Please do not project YOUR requirements upon me. I do not need verifiable evidence of what I KNOW can never be verified. That is unrealistic so I would be a fool to require that. That would be like me saying I require a private jet to get to work or else I am not going to work.

Really!

Thats hard to debate once you put atheists in one box. It makes your OP less productive and serious, and more gearing towards how some atheists are wrong by unsupported opinions while you are right all because you believe you have evidence. As if opinions based on everyday life are wrong and synchronized events based on confirmed bias is somehow right. They have their own place. Its ot an atheist vs. believer thing at all.

Its an one sided conversation.

The problem is, the evidence and facts have to mean something to the person. Evidence and support in religious systems mean nothing without the person being interested in it if he felt it will enrich his life.

Also, like two and two is for, listeing evidence and support doesnt help if the person doesnt know his "math" problems.

It makes me wonder what you are trying to learn from this thread??

I only know one bahai here (and bahaullah so far I read) who wants to learn something. Another person does not. I think maybe being aware of how you present your argments would help--dependng on your motive.

 

[Trailblazer]

“God is not going to tell you who His Messenger is because God does not communicate directly to ordinary humans, only to His chosen Messengers, who then communicate to us. The Messenger tells us what we are able to know about God. “

Except that part about speaking to Messengers or ordinary humans. I'm meant to know that intuitively?

Do you mean are you meant to know the difference between Messengers and ordinary humans intuitively?

If that is what you are asking, no, you cannot know that intuitively. Although intuition plays a part after you locate the Messenger, you need to know where to look and what to look for if you are searching for a Messenger of God. God does not make that really easy, but it is not impossible either.... God would be unjust it was impossible to find and recognize His Messenger, since He is the very proof of God’s existence....

 

[Trailblazer]

What difference does it make, in your view ?

Broadly speaking, it makes a difference if we believe in God and His message, because then we know the Very Purpose of our existence.

I do not see the point of believing God just to believe in God... Moreover, if we believe that there is a God and we know nothing about God we could be believing in a god of our own imagination, and I do not think that is very beneficial. So the upshot of all this is that God without the Messenger is like going out on the ocean and expecting to get across it with no boat. God is like an ocean that is a complete mystery till He is revealed through His Messenger...

I don't.

But let me put it this way: I think it makes sense to want to know whether something is the case. Likewise it also makes sense to want something to be the case. But I don' really see why someone would want to believe something to be the case. I see belief as a mere consequence, not something to be desired in itself.

Putting it in context: One thing is to want to know whether God exists. Another is to want God to exist. And yet another is to want to believe that God exists.

You don’t know any reasons to believe in God or you don’t care about believing in God even if there are reasons to believe in God?

I agree that it makes sense to want to know whether something is the case. It does not matter if certain things are the case, but I certainly think it matters if God is the case, because there are huge implications if God exists, especially if there are things that God wants us to know.

I also agree that it makes sense to want something to be the case, although it depends upon what that something is. Most people would want God to exist although as I said about that atheist woman I knew, she did not want God to exist, even if God did indeed exist. I suppose people could have various reason for wanting God to exist, such as God watching over them and protecting them.

Why wouldn’t someone what to believe something is the case if it was the case? Why is belief not to be desired?

Would you want to know if God exists? Would you want God to exist if God exists? Would you want to believe that God exists if God exists?

That's intriguing. How would it upset her life ?
Did she ever mention it ?

She was not an honest person so she was not going to come out and say that it would upset her lie to believe in God, but it was easy to read between the lines.

It would upset her life because she would have to do things she did not want to do, like following the teachings and laws of a religion. Sure, someone can “just believe in God” but what is the point if it does not change one’s life? In short, she was happy with her life the way it was, with no god, or so she thought. I am very intuitive and I knew her pretty well, so I had a sense about me that she thought God probably existed; otherwise she would not have gotten so angry at me for saying so. I mean the other atheists on that forum who really did not believe god existed were not bothered much by my saying so, because they were secure in their non-belief...

I warn you now, my other hat is psychology, a hat I wore a lot longer than my religion hat, so I naturally analyze people by what they say and how they say it. However, I would never pretend to know what is in someone’s heart or mind; I just had an opinion about that woman because we had so much history. She hated me so much she finally got banned from the forum we were on for telling the forum owner what to do, which was to kick me off the forum. She insulted him and told him he did not know how to run his forum and that was the final straw for him. Before that he had been very tolerant, I never would have allowed her to insult people the way she insulted me on my forum. That forum owner is an atheist and we had issues between us because he did not like my religion either, but he was fair most of the time. We finally had a falling out and I left. I tried to apologize to him for my part in it in a private message but he was so angry that he never responded.

This woman was a control freak and she had serious psychological issues and spiritual issues as well. She hated me so much she sent me a private message but I never read it. I had my husband read it and he said he had never seen anyone that hateful in his entire life. The thing is that I never did anything to deserve that. I tried to be her friend but that was impossible because she hated my religion and she hated me. She even followed me to another forum and posted a very long hateful post there because that forum did not have any rules that were enforced. Of course she used a different handle, but I knew it was her. I felt like I was being stalked but I think it is over now, thank God.

If people do not believe in God or even if they do not want to believe in God I have no problem with that because it is none of my business, so why couldn’t she just leave me alone to believe the way I did?

We are talking about a seriously disturbed person. She knew I was a licensed counselor and what state I lived in so she called the health care authority to find out if my license was in good standing because she thought I was practicing without a license. I wasn’t, but she posted on that forum that I was, just to humiliate me. That forum owner really put her in her place that time.

Sorry to ramble on so, but this was not all for naught because this woman is a good example of a reason to believe in God and follow a religion. If she had believed in God and a religion she would not have behaved that way. I am not saying that all religious people follow the teachings of their religion, but if they do they are not hateful and mean to other people, and just because it was only me that she hated and was mean to is no excuse. Decent people do not treat anyone that way, especially when the target did nothing to deserve such treatment. Also, if people really believe in God they have a fear of God and what could happen to them as a result of their actions.

All that said most atheists I know are moral people, which shows that people do not need to believe in God to be moral. In fact, atheists who live moral lives without hoping for a reward in heaven so we know they are sincere and they really care about other people. I have nothing but good things to say about the atheists I know and I know a lot of atheists. In fact, I have more atheist friends online than friends who are believers. My friends give me a really hard time about my beliefs but I would never judge them for that, especially because I know why they do that; they are ex-Christians and they were hurt badly by Christianity in the past.

I am not sure I follow. If you know that God created you, how can you not believe that God exists ?

Precisely. I cannot not believe God exists even if I want to, so it is a terrible position to be in whenever I wish God did not exist.

Or by 'belief in God', do you mean 'belief in what God says/said' ?

I mean belief that God exists and belief in what God said, which is what God revealed through His Messenger, Baha’u’llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

If you cant justify your claims how do you expect to be taken seriously?

I do not care if people take me seriously, because I am not trying to convince anyone that my beliefs are true. Baha’u’llah wrote that the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone except himself. That means that I cannot justify my beliefs to anyone except myself. Everyone has to justify their beliefs to themselves.

As i said, you consider lack of evidence to be evidence, thats up to you. Im sure it must make things so easy for you.

And talking in circles doesnt help, lets see if i can unscramble what you said

You have evidence there is no evidence because if there were evidence there would be no need for faith.

This is not really that difficult. The reason we need faith is because we cannot prove that God exists. There is evidence, and that evidence for a Baha’i is everything that surrounds the Revelation of Baha’u’llah. The fact that you do not consider that evidence does not mean it is not evidence. It just means it is not evidence to you. But it is evidence to me and about seven million other people in the world. That does not mean it is proof that God exists because nobody can prove that God exists. Evidence is not 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:

When you say evidence I think you mean verifiable evidence which is the same thing as proof, because if something can be verified it is a proven fact. I never claimed to have verifiable evidence that God exists but I did claim to have verifiable evidence that Baha’u’llah existed as well as verifiable evidence of everything that surrounds His life and Mission and His Writings.

I have explained what this evidence is more than once and I have even told people where to look to investigate the categories of evidence.

What cannot be verified is that He received a message from God. That is what has to be taken on faith because it cannot be proven. Baha’is have faith that Baha’u’llah received a message from God because of everything that surrounds His life and Mission and His Writings.

 

[Trailblazer]

By what criteria do you differentiate between someone telling you something you want to hear as true and what is actually true.

I believe something is true only because of the evidence that indicates it is true, not because I want to believe it is true. As I just posted to Christine:

“This is not really that difficult. The reason we need faith is because we cannot prove that God exists. There is evidence, and that evidence for a Baha’i is everything that surrounds the Revelation of Baha’u’llah. The fact that you do not consider that evidence does not mean it is not evidence. It just means it is not evidence to you. But it is evidence to me and about seven million other people in the world. That does not mean it is proof that God exists because nobody can prove that God exists. Evidence is not proof:”

My point was multiple messengers at the same time with the same message is more convincing than a single person claiming everyone else but him go it wrong. Religions have been doing that for centuries.

Maybe it would be more convincing, but God’s intention is not to be convincing. That is what humans want, not what God wants.

Indeed, religions have had one Messenger per religion for centuries and it has always been successful after that religion was accepted by many people. The problem is that once the followers of any religion accept their religion and the Messenger who revealed it, they are unable to recognize any Messenger or religion that came after it. This happens because of emotional attachment and arrogance. For example, Christians believe that Jesus is coming back soon, so there is no way they are going to relinquish that belief because they are emotionally attached to Jesus and they want Him to return. Hell could freeze over and most Christians would still be waiting for Jesus to return. It is the same with the Jews and the Muslims, they are waiting for their Messiah, but since they have made the Messiah in their own image by misconstruing their scriptures, they did not recognize Baha’u’llah, who was the Messiah, and also the return of Christ.

You have conceded the point as it requires changing the person thus it is questionable if the same person still exists.

I do not know what you mean by that. Of course the same person still exists after they die.

Your cited scripture. X is true because it has not been proven false. That is a fallacy.

I never claimed that. It is true to me because I believe it Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. It cannot be proven true or false, although some people believe it is true and some people believe it is false.

Do you think it has been successful in that goal given the low numbers of follower?

It has been successful for those who have become Baha’is. The low numbers are meaningless because how many people believe in a religion does not prove anything. The Baha’i Faith has met with many obstacles ever since its inception, those who sought to bring it down. There is a long history of the opposition and the detractors, but in spite of that the Baha’i Faith was the fastest growing religion in the world from 1910-2010. Statistics show that from 1910-2010, the Baha’i Faith grew at a rate of 3.54%, whereas during that time Islam grew at a rate of 1.97% and Christianity grew at a rate of 1.32%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_religion

All the goals of the Baha’i Faith have been met to date. The goal of the Baha’i Faith administration has never been to increase numbers of adherents but rather to expand to as many locations as possible around the world. These goals have been met. The Baha’i Faith has spread to over 250 countries and territories and is almost as widespread as Christianity. Most of this happened during the “formative age” of the Baha’i Faith (1921-1944) FOURTH PERIOD: THE INCEPTION OF THE FORMATIVE AGE OF THE BAHÁ’Í FAITH 1921–1944

Do note you use of IF. Again what is the criteria you used to determine God's message from someone telling you what you want to hear.

It is all about the evidence. See above.

So? If I went to KSA and starting preaching a new religion I would be tossed in jail as well. Suffering does not indicate something is true.

Straw man. I never said the suffering proves the religion is true. I am not illogical. I said the suffering, imprisonment and banishment from place to place indicates Baha’u’llah was not self-serving. The family of Baha’u’llah was from nobility and could have been very wealthy. He was offered a post as a minister in the government which He declined, because He was a follower of the Bab. The Life of Baha'u'llah is a photographic narrative which briefly explains the chronology.

Self-serving as in it is easy to claim everyone else is misled but one person and a tiny group of followers.

There is no evidence that Baha’u’llah had any selfish motives and all the evidence is to the contrary.

The number of followers is totally irrelevant... Actually, it is not totally irrelevant because only a few people recognize God’s new religion in the beginning, and that is why the Baha’i Faith is still relatively small.

Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”

As this relates to religion, the religion at the narrow gate is the religion God wants us to find and follow, and it is the gate that leads to eternal life. But it is not that easy for most people to find this gate because most people are steeped in religious tradition or attached to what they already believe. If they do not have a religion, most people are suspicious of the new religion and the new messenger. If they are atheists they do not like the idea of messengers of God or they think they are all phonies.

Jesus told us to enter through the narrow gate, the gate that leads to eternal life, and He said few people would find that gate... It is narrow, so it is difficult to get through... It is difficult to get through because one has to be willing to give up all their preconceived ideas, have an open mind, and think for themselves. Most people do not normally embark upon such a journey. They go through the wide gate, the easy one to get through – their own religious tradition or their own preconceived ideas about God or no god. They follow that broad road that is easiest for them to travel. That is human nature.

Eventually it won’t matter how small the Baha’i Faith was in the beginning because in the distant future everyone will recognize Baha’u’llah and enter through the same gate, the gate that leads to life. However, those that enter now will have a huge reward after they die, because they made the effort to look for the narrow gate and they had the courage and common sense to walk through it, rather than following the crowd or their own ego.

You missed the point. Blaming others for being unconvinced of a religion is easy. It's a copout.

Straw man. I never blamed anyone. I only ever said that it is everyone’s individual responsibility to search for the Messenger of God. If they do not search they cannot blame anyone else but if they search and find it and still do not find it to their liking that is just the way it is. Not all people are going to be convinced, and the primary reasons they are not convinced I just explained above.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is not MY personal opinion, it is a BELIEF shared by about 7 million other people

LOL Sorry, but that fact that you share a personal belief with 7 million other people doesn't change the reality that it's STILL your PERSONAL BELIEF.

No, it is not just MY personal belief, it is the personal belief of about seven million people. I am not saying that that proves anything, but the likelihood of it being true is greater than the likelihood that one lone atheist has the truth, especially because he has NO WAY to KNOW anything about the god in question.

I have verifiable evidence that Baha’u’llah existed and who He was as a person, what He did on his mission, what He wrote, and the religion He established, prophecies that were fulfilled by Him, and predictions He made that came true. By contrast, ALL this atheist has is a personal opinion, with nothing to back it up. It is based upon what he thinks a god would do if it were real, he having NO WAY to know that.

I have VERIFIABLE evidence that some guy named Saint Nicholas actually existed! Of COURSE that doesn't do ANYTHING to establish that all of the mythology that surrounds Santa Claus is actually REAL.

We are not talking about Moses or Jesus. We are talking about Baha’u’llah. Everything surrounding His Life and Mission can be VERIFIED. As such, it is not mythology. It is FACT. Non-Baha’is who were historians have even written about these facts.

You have your PERSONAL OPINION that Baha'u'llah established prophecies that were fulfilled by him. This atheist has his PERSONAL OPINION as well. The only difference I see is that the atheists claims are based on what HE made up and YOUR claims are based on what OTHER people made up. AGAIN, why is it better to believe OTHER people's made up stories instead of your own?

Those are not MY stories. I guess you are alleging that the prophets in the Bible made up the prophecies. Of course, I do not believe that. Baha’u’llah did not establish those prophecies, they were fulfilled by His Coming and after He came. That is covered in the book entitled Thief in the Night.

Also, the predictions Baha’u’llah made came true, and that in incontrovertible: In this book is a list of 30 things that Baha’u’llah predicted that actually came to pass: The Challenge of Baha'u'llah

What is better about what is recorded in the Bible vs. what this one lone atheist made up? Mind you, I am not saying that all the stories in the Bible are literally true, but again, the chances of it all being false is next to zero. However, the chances of what this atheist OPINION being false is next to 100%, since he bases his OPINION upon nothing except what he calls “the use of reason” and it is only HIS reason he bases everything upon. The other salient point is that his arguments are drop dead illogical. He cannot even understand the simply fallacy he commits when says that most messengers were false, therefore there cannot be a true Messenger of God.

All the evidence I have cited is verifiable. The only thing that is NOT verifiable is that Baha’u’llah got a revelation from God. Nobody can prove such a thing since we did not GET the revelation. I do not waste my time waiting for verifiable evidence of things that can never BE verified.

Yeah, and the ONLY part that matters is whether or not the revelation ACTUALLY came from god. If it can NEVER be verified then there is NEVER a good reason to accept it as true. I do not waste my time accepting fantastical claims that can NOT be verified. Without VERIFICATION it's not worthy of my belief. CLEARLY you do not adhere to such standards and are willing to accept fantastical claims WITHOUT verifiable evidence.

You are absolutely correct. The ONLY part that matters is whether or not the revelation ACTUALLY came from God. Even though it can NEVER be verified then there is a good reason to accept it as true.... That REASON is all the other EVIDENCE that indicates that Baha’u’llah was telling the TRUTH. The other reason is that what Baha’u’llah revealed could well be the Truth from God and you could be rejecting it just because you want verifiable evidence which is impossible to obtain for obvious reasons that make sense if you reason it out.

That is either taken on faith (based upon evidence we have about Him) or not.

EXACTLY! You either take it on FAITH, WITHOUT any verifiable evidence that these messages came from god or you QUESTION if they actually came from god BECAUSE there is no verifiable evidence. And since people can have faith in absolutely ANYTHING, it's OBVIOUS that faith is NOT a reliable path to truth. So anyone who relies on 'faith' CLEARLY isn't interested in ACTUAL truth.

Do you know the logical fallacy you just committed? I hope you are not going to be as illogical as my atheist friend.

The fact that people can have faith in absolutely ANYTHING, in no way proves that what a person has faith in CANNOT BE the truth. It might be the truth or it might not be the truth.

Certainly, faith ALONE is not a reliable path to the truth, so one would not want base a belief in God or Baha’u’llah on faith alone. One would want good evidence to support one’s faith. Moreover, the evidence comes first, then the faith.

 

[Trailblazer]

Thats hard to debate once you put atheists in one box. It makes your OP less productive and serious, and more gearing towards how some atheists are wrong by unsupported opinions while you are right all because you believe you have evidence.

It makes me wonder what you are trying to learn from this thread??

I explained to Jim why I posted this thread. It was not intended to elicit any debate about who is right and who is wrong. I was just trying to gather information, to get opinions from atheists and agnostics regarding the questions in the OP. I cannot help it if some atheists want to debate with me. I just answer posts as they come in.

I did not post the OP to talk about my beliefs but as usual the thread derailed after a few posts. Here is part of my explanation to Jim:

“I did not want to divulge this before because I thought it would bias the answers I got to my questions, but now that most people have responded I can explain the reason I posted this thread.....

There is an atheist on another forum who insists that if god were real god would want 100% of people in the world to believe in Him. He thinks that anything less than 100% has to be a failure on the part of god to communicate properly. According to him, none of this can be human failure to believe in what god communicated through messengers; it is all god’s fault for communicating improperly. He does not believe humans have free will or that they are responsible for anything. He does not even think criminals are responsible for their behavior although he will admit they have to be put in jail to protect society.

He thinks that the best way god could accomplish the 100% belief would be to communicate directly to everyone, to each and every human being in the world, to all 7.44 billion people. There is absolutely nothing more ridiculous, to think that god owes every person on earth their own personal message, or that god would have to communicate that way to prove he exists. Just because 7% of the population is atheists who reject God’s messengers, God is not obligated to send them a personal message to prove He exists.

He thinks that using Messengers is a very poor method of communication because (a) only 93% of people in the world believe in God, and (b) hardly anyone believes in the “new” Messenger when He appears or for a long time afterwards.

He completely disregards the human element of choice, so he cannot understand why the main reason people do not to believe in the new messenger is because they are attached to their older religions and messengers, and they believe they are the only true religions and messengers; or if they are nonbelievers they do not believe god would have messengers. In his mind, it is all a failure on the part of god to communicate properly because humans cannot fail. He thinks god is omnipotent so god should prove he exists. He also thinks that since god is omnipotent god can show up on earth.

So I posted this thread because I wanted to find out what other atheists and agnostics thought about this. As I expected, when I went back and told him nobody agreed with him, he said he did not care what anyone else thinks, so he asked me why I even bothered to tell him. I told him that there are other atheists on that forum who might be interested in what other atheists think, and that I do not only post to him for him to read what I post.”

 

[Sir Doom]

Do you mean are you meant to know the difference between Messengers and ordinary humans intuitively?

If that is what you are asking, no, you cannot know that intuitively. Although intuition plays a part after you locate the Messenger, you need to know where to look and what to look for if you are searching for a Messenger of God. God does not make that really easy, but it is not impossible either.... God would be unjust it was impossible to find and recognize His Messenger, since He is the very proof of God’s existence....

No what I meant was that knowing that God uses Messengers at all is something 'about God' that I would have to know before learning about God from a Messenger. The same goes for God not talking to regular people. I just know that, right? Except that I don't.

I can take your word for it. But then, I have no idea if you are a messenger so I can't trust what you say about God, right? Where does that leave us?

 

[Sir Doom]

Side note: Ask you atheist friend if omnipotent God knows how to do anything and everything in addition to being able to do anything and everything.

Omnipotent implies omniscient IMHO.