Questions for Atheists and Agnostics

[Trailblazer]

I've explained it many times in many threads in many ways. Either you guys don't address it and stop talking or get defensive so it goes no where. It's as if you guys don't want to see god any other way as god can be spoken of in many ways without changing how you guys try to define it for some and describe it for others.

I am sorry, I do not recall you explaining how we can prove God does not exist or how can we prove the nature of god.

I see God in the only way “I believe” that we can know God – through revelations from God to Messengers of God. As far as I am concerned, anything else is pure speculation and as such it seems to me like a waste of time. However, to each his or her own. We all choose to spend our time differently.

Kinds hard to converse on forums without going out of your comfort zone, now folding the link table, think other the other person too, and go deeper into the conversation which means topics that are not just your opinion.

I'm beginning to think it's just a bahai thing just as christians have their thing.

I am open to any and all opinions and beliefs and non-beliefs people have, and I try very hard to understand them. That does not mean I am going to compromise my own beliefs though, I will still hold fast to them.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Hmm

I am sorry, I do not recall you explaining how we can prove God does not exist or how can we prove the nature of god.

Yeah. Many times. I even made some threads on it and I think by the reaction people think I'm questioning their beliefs as if:

I see God in the only way “I believe” that we can know God – through revelations from God to Messengers of God. As far as I am concerned, anything else is pure speculation and as such it seems to me like a waste of time. However, to each his or her own

I'm telling then to believe something they don't. Instead, instead of writing it off as speculation, one thing about Convo is to see truth in other people's views while not:

I am open to any and all opinions and beliefs and non-beliefs people have, and I try very hard to understand them. That does not mean I am going to compromise my own beliefs though, I will still hold fast to them.

Needing to think you are compromising your own beliefs.

That's why it gets no where. That's what defensiveness is, really. You think I'm overstepping your right to believe X when I'm just asking the Logic behind it not whether it's true; that's not my place to judge your faith. I can point out errors in its logic but not connect those errors as if they belittle you and not the logic of the religion itself.

But it's not just you. Other bahai does it. Some christians do...

Heck, if someone question the logic of why I talk to my aunt who has passed, I can tell them. I won't repeat beliefs but give them an idea of how it makes sense to me beyond regurgitating beliefs.

My best friend doesn't like music. I was I mean, who Doesn't like music. If she asked me the logistics behind my interest I can tell her. Not just i-like-music. She knows that. Go deeper.

Ag least that's me since Im not indoctrinated into any faith (meaning, I'm not restricted or in a box, lbs, to think X way and disregard Y and Z)

Not my thing. But not everyone is that (type) of open. Few are

 

[ecco]

At age nine I realized that God was pretty much the same as any of the characters in my comic books. Over the years I learned that different people believed in different Gods. Over the years I learned that people have always created Gods. It's been a long journey but the truth I came to realize at age nine is still the truth all these many years later - Gods are the creation of man's imaginings.

At the age of nine??? I guess what is really important is what you are not telling me.

Did you miss this part...

Over the years I learned that different people believed in different Gods.​

Did you miss this part...

Over the years I learned that people have always created Gods. It's been a long journey but the truth I came to realize at age nine is still the truth all these many years later - Gods are the creation of man's imaginings.
​

What more do you think there is?

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: My belief is that every religion has its Messengers who got the Word of God from God.

ecco said: Yes, that is what every religion says. Yours is no different.

And as far as I am concerned, they are all right about that.

Did he have these several wives simultaneously? Does your religion advocate men having several wives?

Yes, He did have them simultaneously, and no, we do not advocate having more than one wife. This was part of the Muslim culture. Men had several wives in order to protect the woman. For example, if one had a brother whose wife died, his brother was duty bound to marry that wife in order to protect her. An unmarried woman in that culture was in danger of being enslaved or killed. One need not assume that men have several wives for sex.

Many people believe polygamy is disgraceful and disgusting.

How does that change the disgraceful sexual behavior of politicians and others? Or do you think that is okay?

Polygamy in order to protect the woman as was the case in Muslim culture is not disgusting. Do you know that in the days of Muhammad nomads would cast away female newborns in the desert to die? That was how much they devalued women.

Your religion does (unless the participants are married to each other).

Yes it does say that it is not okay to have sex for pleasure unless you are married, but that only applies to Baha’is. If people choose to become a Baha’i, they know what the Baha’i Laws are.

Evolution also did not design the human body to have sex throughout life. So it's obviously better to enjoy it at a young age - married or not.

I know, I just thought of evolution this morning, before I read what you wrote.

In the authoritative Writings of the Baha’i Faith, it says to marry while you are young and still in possession of your full vigor so you can enjoy sex while you can. There are no prohibitions against enjoying sex in the Baha’i Faith.

Trailblazer said: Did you know that there are people who are asexual?
13 Things Asexuals Are Tired Of Hearing

ecco said: Not pertinent to the conversation.

No, it is not pertinent except that it demonstrates that everyone does not want of need sex, meaning it is not necessarily as you said, natural for everyone.

No. And they can't make up and worship gods either. However, if we believe that roaches have existed for 300 million years, it is clear that god favors them over humans.

Why would it be the case that God favors roaches over humans just because they evolved long before humans? Maybe God was working out how He wanted humans to be and it took a while.

No different than any other start up religion: Borrow from other religions, change a few things, throw some new things into the pot and hope for followers.

Oh, it is very different from any other religion. Show me one of the older religions that delineated what the soul is and what its eternal destination is. In the Bible (OT), it says that the soul is the breath of life, so most Christians believe that when the body dies, the soul also dies. The Writings of the Baha’i Faith explain how the soul animates the human body and allows it to live and function and how the soul continues to exist after we die. In fact the soul is who we are, our personality, whereas the body is just a vehicle that houses the soul and allows it to exist while we are alive in the physical body on earth.

After we die, the physical body dies and the soul continues on to the spiritual world and takes on a new form, made up of heavenly elements that exist in that realm. No other religions have ever revealed as much as Baha’u’llah revealed about the soul or the afterlife. The afterlife is still a mystery, but at least we have some basic information.

Of course, back to channel atheist and all of that was just made up to garner followers. I could never believe that all that was made up, because I know that there was no motive for Him making it up, since Baha’u’llah was not looking to garner any followers. He even said so:

“Who can ever believe that this Servant of God hath at any time cherished in His heart a desire for any earthly honor or benefit? The Cause associated with His Name is far above the transitory things of this world. Behold Him, an exile, a victim of tyranny, in this Most Great Prison. His enemies have assailed Him on every side, and will continue to do so till the end of His life. Whatever, therefore, He saith unto you is wholly for the sake of God, that haply the peoples of the earth may cleanse their hearts from the stain of evil desire, may rend its veil asunder, and attain unto the knowledge of the one true God—the most exalted station to which any man can aspire. Their belief or disbelief in My Cause can neither profit nor harm Me. We summon them wholly for the sake of God. He, verily, can afford to dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 85​

Of course, back to channel atheist and Baha’u’llah could have been lying, but all we have to do is read about His life to know that he did not seek any earthly honor or benefit. He came from a wealthy family and He rejected a high post in the government that would have given Him a cushy life, lost all his possessions and property to promote the Cause of the Bab. Later He was imprisoned and exiles and banished from place to place, for forty years. So then, if we are logical, we have to ask why He did all of what He did, if not for the sake of God.

Back to channel atheist, and you might say He was just deluded or psychotic, but the problem with that is that a psychotic could never do what He did, nor would a psychotic have any motive to do what He did. A con man is selfish so he does not sacrifice anything for others so we can chalk that off our list. Motive is everything since it drives human behavior, so we have to look at possible motives if we are to be logical rather than emotional.

The salient point is that no “real” Messenger of God had any personal motive. Con-men and false prophets have personal motives, to gain power or money. Messengers of God do not have any personal motives. We know that by looking at their lives. They suffer and sacrifice everything they could have had for themselves.

We can know about gods by studying the origins and histories of gods. When one does this, one finds that all are the creations of man's imaginings.

That is what you find but that is not what I find, or what most people find, given 84 percent of the world population has a faith and those faiths all have some kind of Founder, what I refer to as a Messenger of God who brought a revelation from God.

That doesn't change the fact that religiously inspired guilt regarding sexual orientation is one of the leading causes of suicides among young people. Even when the person does not commit suicide, there are tremendous, lasting feelings of shame and guilt.

Well, I was not aware of that statistic, and I do not know what can be done about it. Most of that guilt comes from religions such as Christianity and Islam since they constitute 55% of the world population, so I do not see that changing any time soon. It would be nice if attitudes towards homosexuals changed, and that is slowly starting to change in Christianity.

You make my argument of religiously created guilt more eloquently than I can.

I agree about the guilt, but just because homosexuals feel guilty for being homosexual, you cannot expect religious people to change their beliefs, although they can either keep those beliefs to themselves or they can be accepting and compassionate and not judge homosexuals. Religious people should have compassion and not judge other people, both important teachings of the Baha’i Faith. Jesus also taught not to judge others lest we be judged, so if Christians judge people they are going against their own teachings.

 

[Trailblazer]

Sex is about giving pleasure as well as receiving pleasure. How does giving pleasure represent selfish desires.

There are ages where women feel less of a sexual drive than before. Wouldn't it be selfish of them to stop giving sexual pleasure?

There are ages when men become incapable of having intercourse. Wouldn't it be selfish of them to stop giving sexual pleasure in other ways?

These are good questions. Unfortunately, the answers are not so simple because they depend upon the couple and what kind of relationship they have, what their individual wants and needs are, what their values are, and what their individual likes and dislikes are, as well as what they can live with and what they can live without. The upshot is that there is no “right answer” because the couple has to work that out between themselves.

Sex is about giving pleasure as well as receiving pleasure. How does giving pleasure represent selfish desires.

No, that is not selfish, not unless the reason one is doing so is to get something back.

There are ages where women feel less of a sexual drive than before. Wouldn't it be selfish of them to stop giving sexual pleasure?

It might be selfish, but not necessarily. It depends upon what kinds of activities they are willing to be engaged in. Both parties need to be considered.

There are ages when men become incapable of having intercourse. Wouldn't it be selfish of them to stop giving sexual pleasure in other ways?

It might be selfish, but not necessarily. It depends upon what kinds of activities they are willing to be engaged in. Both parties need to be considered.

Really, what it boils down to is the wants and needs of both parties and that has to be worked out between them. I do not think it is selfish for one of them not to want to be engaged in any kind of sexual activity if it is unwanted, at any age. Of course, that would present a problem for most couples if one wanted to have sex and the other didn’t.

I have a funny story to tell you that my husband likes to tell about his Great Aunt Carrie. This happened sometime before my husband was born in 1942. On the night of her honeymoon, Aunt Carrie locked herself in the bathroom and she had her husband promise that under no circumstances whatsoever would they ever have sex. He agreed and the marriage continued until he died much later. She worshiped her husband because he was willing to give that up and she understood what he had to give up. She was not naïve.

Anyhow, my husband’s Great Aunt Carrie really wanted children, but she was not willing to have sex in order to have a child. Ironically, she was the only real mother my husband ever had because she loved children so much. My husband was the child she was never able to have. His mother did not really want children and rather felt that her husband was using the children to control her. She associated a husband and children with being in jail. She wanted to kick up her heels and have a good time. Later, they got divorced and his father remarried twice.

My husband would not be the person he is today if he had not had Aunt Carrie. He only knows what love is because of her love for him. I was not so lucky because my mother was not loving.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Trailblazer

I never heard of the christian god being a deity. Deities remind me of Zues and the gods of Olympias, and Athena of the Pantheon etc. God is different. He is considered in various terms a force or life of a given living being and person. The former confuses the heck out of me, the latter I can explain the nature of.

People have been trying to describe god (what keeps us alive) for thousands of years. Each person has their supernatural theories. Some say different deities reflect different parts of the universe. Some multiple deities other one origin.

The supernatural has been described the world since time begining. Today isnt different; so, it has no more validity than it did and its purpose thousands of years ago.

But my problem isnt the belief. Everyone has their belief from thinking spirits exist in statues to people being deified, but to say other people reject or dont benefit from your said deity and dont acknowledge the god of your manefistations definitions is totaly misplaced.

While we are proud of our beliefs, our ego about wanting others to believe has killed thousands of people. So, when I see it, I think of that rather than just an opinion. Its an unatractive one.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually, regarding sexual behavior, the Baha’i “standards” are higher than the standards of the older religions. I do not consider that uptight. It is religious Law. The moral laxity in modern culture in the Western world is eating away at the very fiber of society. I do not consider it “uptight” to require people to be married before they have sex. I consider it prudent and beneficial for the soul; but if you are an atheist you do not believe in a soul so it is a moot point. Regarding sex, most people just want what they want like a little kid who wants candy from mommy. I consider this childish as well as selfish.

How do you think it's "prudent and beneficial" to delay sex until marriage? It seems to me that the opposite is true.

Sex is an important component of a married relationship; if spouses go into a marriage with no sexual experience at all, then that component of the relationship - and therefore the relationship overall - will be worse off.

On top of that, when a person hears negative messages about sex through their childhood and adolescence as their religion tries to steer them away from premarital sex, those negative feelings associated with sex don't necessarily just switch off on their wedding day. Often, those negative associations persist into marriage, creating a situation that's even less healthy than what you would have otherwise.

Religious opposition to premarital sex is some pretty toxic stuff, even if we only consider its impact on married people.

And when you combine it with a notion that same-sex marriage isn't "real" marriage, then that toxicity gets much, much worse.

I have no issue condemning the religious teachinh of "no sex outside of marriage" as immoral and harmful. In many contexts (e.g. when it's combined with a rejection of same-sex marriage), I would call it evil.

 

[ArtieE]

Clearly, not all atheists are searching for God, only some are.

I am also very interested in psychology. I studied it for years and I have an advanced degree in counseling psychology. I have only recently come to be interested in God, even though I have believed in God for about 48 years.

I found an interesting article on the role of religion in counseling. It must be a difficult balancing act. The Role of Religion in Counseling | CounselingPsychology.org

 

[ArtieE]

Purpose: the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists.https://www.google.com/search

Only humans have goals. God does not have goals because God already knows everything past, present, and future, since God is Omniscient, so God knows the desired result.

God was the Creator of humanity so God has a Purpose for humanity. God’s purpose for everything that He has revealed to Messengers and all the religions thus far established was to usher in the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, long-afflicted humanity.

1. And what's the purpose and reason for Gods' existence in the first place?
2. I can imagine if dinosaurs hadn't died out but evolved bigger brains I bet they would evolve religions with Messengers to usher in the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, long-afflicted dinosaurity.

 

[Bird123]

Did you miss this part...

Over the years I learned that different people believed in different Gods.​

Did you miss this part...

Over the years I learned that people have always created Gods. It's been a long journey but the truth I came to realize at age nine is still the truth all these many years later - Gods are the creation of man's imaginings.
​

What more do you think there is?

What happened at nine years old you are not talking about? I see this is when you closed the doors to the possibilities and started accepting your or someone else's beliefs.

Simply because you can not agree with what religion is teaching or what people are telling you about God does not mean God does not exist.

Religion is mankind's attempt to understand God. Even though many think their beliefs are true and is all they need to know, isn't there always more to Discover?

AS I see it, the only ones who loose are the ones who stop searching for more knowledge. On the other hand, many do not want to know at all. They are comfortable in their box of Beliefs. This also includes the box of beliefs that God does not exist. Are you Comfortable???

 

[Bird123]

As it happens, yes i did and went on to track day racing. What has that to do with evolution, fractals and qm??? Oh i get it, you have no idea so make something up? Also you appear to know little of science and physics.

Stop deluding yourself, you did not even take last place, but you got a good failed to start rating.

You forgot to capitalise or quote "Truth" to different it from the dictionary definition, that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.

No competition, just facts, evidence and reality. I have little tolerance for distortion of objectivity in order to massage personal subjective woo.

Making something up?? To what end?? I can not change what exists around us. I tried to make it easy to understand but clearly you do not have a clue.

How about this? Study Evolution, Fractals, and Quantum Entanglement. Figure out how they all fit together and why. There is much to discover.

 

[ChristineM]

Making something up?? To what end?? I can not change what exists around us. I tried to make it easy to understand but clearly you do not have a clue.

How about this? Study Evolution, Fractals, and Quantum Entanglement. Figure out how they all fit together and why. There is much to discover.

You claim you tried easy and failed so try difficult. Explain how god magic without evidence of god to perform god magic really works?

How about this for a suggestion, you are making the claims, how about you validating your claims.

Think though, if its not too much for you. In 10,000 years plus of god worship literally billions of people have failed to provide evidence for any sort of god. Making gods the most failed concept in human history.

So if you can provide evidence of god magic you would put an end to faith, decimate atheism and have world religious leaders on your speed dial.

 

[ecco]

Yes, He did have them simultaneously, and no, we do not advocate having more than one wife. This was part of the Muslim culture. Men had several wives in order to protect the woman. ...One need not assume that men have several wives for sex.

Do you know why he had several wives? Maybe he was just catering to his baser instincts. Messenger Jesus had no wives and, allegedly, was chaste.

How does that change the disgraceful sexual behavior of politicians and others? Or do you think that is okay?

You call the behavior of run of the mill politicians disgraceful and at the same time you defend the same behavior of your Messenger. That seems a little hypocritical.

Polygamy in order to protect the woman as was the case in Muslim culture is not disgusting.

Again, do you know why he had several wives?

Yes it does say that it is not okay to have sex for pleasure unless you are married, but that only applies to Baha’is.

So, as I previously stated, Baha'is are just as uptight about sex as many other religions. Same old, same old.

In the authoritative Writings of the Baha’i Faith, it says to marry while you are young and still in possession of your full vigor so you can enjoy sex while you can. There are no prohibitions against enjoying sex in the Baha’i Faith.

Again, unless you are married to only one person who is of the opposite sex. Unless you are the founder/messenger, in which case it's OK to follow the norms of your culture and have several wives. Do you not see the hypocrisy?

RE: asexuals

No, it is not pertinent except that it demonstrates that everyone does not want of need sex, meaning it is not necessarily as you said, natural for everyone.

Did I say "natural for everyone"? I think I said it was natural. There is no such thing as "natural for everyone" except maybe eating, breathing and dying. The fact that some people do not want to engage in sex is OK for them - period.

Why would it be the case that God favors roaches over humans just because they evolved long before humans? Maybe God was working out how He wanted humans to be and it took a while.

Don't you believe that your god is eternal? If so, he had an infinity of years to ponder everything long before he created a roach.
Think about it.

Oh, it is very different from any other religion. Show me one of the older religions that delineated what the soul is ...whereas the body is just a vehicle that houses the soul

As I said, borrow, make some changes and declare yourself the head of a new religion. There are older religions that claim the body is just a temporary vessel.

After we die,... No other religions have ever revealed as much as Baha’u’llah revealed about the soul or the afterlife. The afterlife is still a mystery, but at least we have some basic information

.
Nothing new here. So what did he reveal about the afterlife that still makes it a mystery. The Mormons have a lot of information about the afterlife. Muslims believe their (male) martyrs will get 7 (72?) virgins in heaven. That's pretty specific.

... I could never believe that all that was made up, because I know that there was no motive for Him making it up, since Baha’u’llah was not looking to garner any followers. He even said so:

“...Their belief or disbelief in My Cause can neither profit nor harm Me. ​

​

You really do not understand the desire for power do you? You really do not understand the desire of some men to assure a place in history, do you?

Of course, back to channel atheist and Baha’u’llah could have been lying, ... So then, if we are logical, we have to ask why He did all of what He did, if not for the sake of God.

See above.

... but the problem with that is that a psychotic could never do what He did ...nor would a psychotic have any motive to do what He did.

Jim Jones still has a following as do Marshall Applewhite and David Koresh. I think they can be classified as psychotic.

The salient point is that no “real” Messenger of God had any personal motive.

How do you know his personal motives? Gandhi and Mandela suffered as much for their beliefs as your Messenger for his, were they also "Messengers".

Well, I was not aware of that statistic, and I do not know what can be done about it. Most of that guilt comes from religions such as Christianity and Islam since they constitute 55% of the world population, so I do not see that changing any time soon. It would be nice if attitudes towards homosexuals changed, and that is slowly starting to change in Christianity.

Your religion tells homosexuals they are in the wrong just like Islam and Christianity. Your religion tells unwed people that having sex is wrong just like Islam and Christianity. Yet, somehow you don't think laying guilt applies to Baha'i. Again, the hypocrisy is noted.

I agree about the guilt, but just because homosexuals feel guilty for being homosexual, you cannot expect religious people to change their beliefs

No I don't. Religious people just follow the tenets of their religion. The fault lies with the hypocritical male founders of today's major religions.

 

[Sir Doom]

No, that is not what I meant by fulfillment of prophecy. What I meant was that He “fulfilled prophecies” of all the past religions including the Bible by virtue of when He appeared, where He appeared, what He did when He appeared, and what other things happened as the result of His appearance.

That's exactly how I took it. My point stands.

In other words, the OT and NT Bible prophecies say that the man who is the Messiah/Return of Christ will come at a certain time to a certain place and do certain things.... All those things happened. That is something that is definitely true that could not be true if Baha’u’llah was not a messenger (the Messiah/Return of Christ, which also makes Him a Messenger of God.

And as I said, that is not definitely true. You talk about these things indirectly, but I asked for one something and you can't give it. You have to remain in this catch-all blanket language. Let's try this. Pick any one of those prophecies that Baha'u'llah fulfilled and I will demonstrate exactly what I mean.

Now, let me explain something else. Baha’u’llah could not control when He came, where He came to or what He did when He came in order to do what you called “him being a messenger.” For example, He could not control when He was born, where He was born, and he could not control what happened to Him in His Life, because He was a prisoner and an exile and he was banished from place to place by those who held the reins of power during His 40 year mission. He could not control what happened after He died either. As a result of the Coming of Baha’u’llah, the Bahá'í World Centre came to be established on Mount Carmel, in Haifa, Israel with its beautiful gardens is the fulfillment of prophecies in the OT. For example:

You're right, Baha'u'llah could not help when he was born or any of that. But God could. Which means its illogical to mention any of this. The point of mentioning the timeline in the vague way I did was to demonstrate the abject failure of the concept to reach 'everyone' in 'one fell swoop' it didn't even reach the intended recipient until well into his adult life. How can you possibly call that success when stacked against the very same God giving someone a sign and immediately getting their attention?!?!

Thanks. It sure feels like that but I am not good at resting. I am cutting back though, at least till I get the most important things done.

Wise.

Goal: the object of a person's ambition or effort; an aim or desired result.

Purpose: the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists.

Hey, the dictionary offers different definitions for different words. Imagine that! Now same question:

Can you tell me the literal, functional or fundamental difference between:
'The object of a person's effort'
and
'The reason for which something is done'

Only humans have goals. God does not have goals because God already knows everything past, present, and future, since God is Omniscient, so God knows the desired result.

Except that God can also manipulate past present and future such that it isn't really fixed. Which leaves some wiggle room for creativity through which there might still be goal oriented actions even for omnipotence.

God was the Creator of humanity so God has a Purpose for humanity. God’s purpose for everything that He has revealed to Messengers and all the religions thus far established was to usher in the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, long-afflicted humanity.

Sounds like a worthwhile goal.

You are using the word religious in a different context than I was using it. When I say religious I mean associated with a specific religion such as Christianity or Islam. Maybe what you mean is spiritual. People can be spiritual without being religious. Being close to God does not require a religion.

True enough, but I'm talking about countless examples of people in church literally professing that a sign from God got them there.

How do you think you know God’s intention?

It's assumptive from the premise. God communicates in order to communicate. That's basic logic. That's true when using a messenger or when sending a sign.

God wished a message to be delivered but God does not expect everyone to believe in that message. God knows some people will not believe in the message because we all have free will to choose. God is not on any timeline because God already knows the end result; that everyone will believe in the message eventually.

So... Eventually (and occasionally) we will lose free will to choose?

God did not fail to get the message out. God sent Baha’u’llah who wrote down the message and it is now available to everyone. It is the humans who failed when they rejected the message. Granted, some people do not know about it yet, but there is no reason to think that God expected or cared that a lot of people would accept the message of Baha’u’llah within the first 155 years.

There IS a reason to expect that. Because God is the sole engineer of the entire process, why wouldn't he care how it turns out????

It is successful for that one person, but it only succeeds in getting them to know God exists. It does succeed in imparting any of the information they need to know about God or God’s will for them.

That's on God, though! God can impart as much or as little as God wants in any sign or message or communication of any kind to anyone! That is up to God regardless of our limitations.

It is only failed by your human standards according to what you consider a failure vs. a success. Do you understand that?

Of course I do. Do you understand that my human notion of successful communication is grounded in the logic that it must in fact communicate successfully in order to be successful communication?

God has a different idea of what is a success. God is not on any timeline and God is in no hurry.

Then why send certain people signs, effectively short circuiting the typical mode of communication if not to expedite it?

Messengers are the only communication method that works to accomplish God’s Purposes, which is to get an important message out to everyone in one fell swoop. It does not matter if everyone gets it right away. Baha’u’llah garnered a few followers during His lifetime and those few spread the message to others over time and eventually everyone will get the message.

How can you call it one fell swoop, then?!?!?

So what? If they don’t hear them that won’t be because they are not available to read. However, not everyone was intended to become a Baha’i, at least not in this early stage. I could conjecture all day long why some people believe in Baha’u’llah and others do not, but it is a mystery of God why that is the case.Only a few of us get in on the ground floor, those who God was pleased to guide.

The 'so what' if it is that in order to be successful communication to everyone it has to actually be everyone. And it most certainly isn't everyone receiving the message as you readily admit, and yet continually insist it is successful communication to everyone.

God does communicate to all of humanity but all of humanity does not accept that communication. You cannot blame God for that. Sure, an Omnipotent God could communicate another way wherein everyone would get the message, but God does not need everyone to get the message; God leaves that up to humans to decide of they want it or not. That is why God created us with free will.

That's like saying HBO wants everyone to watch Game of Thrones and it isn't HBO's fault that everyone can't afford it. It is their fault, and thus they don't really want that, either. They really just want everyone to pay them and would be more than happy to get paid regardless of Game of Thrones. If they wanted everyone to watch it, it would be free or they'd even reward you for watching it if you didn't want to. But ultimately they don't care who watches it, so long as people pay to do so.

That is exactly what you are describing God as, except (according to you) God has no goal that analogs with making money which means he's being selective for some vast inexplicable non-goal. My skepticism is a (purposefully) exaggerated form of normal human logic. As God is well aware of my willfully skeptical mind, so too is God well aware of (and, in fact, responsible for) the general skepticism of the human species. Which means that by using a messenger, God is intentionally excluding those of us who are skeptical (willful or otherwise). So, yes. It IS God's fault that we do not receive the message. As everything that ever happens anywhere for any reason IS God's fault by virtue of omniscient knowledge and omnipotent control thereof.

Questioning why God does what God does is not challenging His Authority, but thinking you could have done a better job is. Go ahead and challenge God’s Authority and see where it gets you. It won’t get you any closer to knowing is God exists, and what God does or why.

Again, speak for yourself. You could not fathom the experience I've had in this regard, as you are blissfully unaware of it. I've shared none of it with you. Thus, the above is conjecture at best, and it would be wise of you to keep that to your own experiences.

God is Omniscient so God knows everything before, during and after it happens in our world. So of course God already knows who will be wheat and who will be chaff. However, God wants us to become wheat or chaff by the choices we make and the actions we take.

Then you must understand that God sifted the wheat from the chaff long before either existed. Meaning God had every intention of making both. Meaning that spitting on the messenger is as much 'God's plan' as listening to the messenger.

I know I make it sound like God is a human but God cannot be elitist or self-aggrandizing because God is not a human. Only humans have egos. What I am explaining is a process of sifting. By the process of acceptance or rejection of the Messenger the wheat are separated from the chaff. This happens every time God sends a Messenger, and in the beginning there are only are only a few wheat. The chaff are those who know about the message and reject tit, but most people that have not done that yet with Baha’u’llah. They are not wheat or chaff yet but they have the potential to become either.

I was talking about you. You are calling yourself God's wheat and those who don't believe in the messenger God's chaff.

After I thought about it for a while I realized it is not really that difficult. I have discussed this so much with atheists on other forums that I could write it in my sleep. Actually there are two different questions -- Why do we need Messengers of God? .

The question is not:

Why do we need messengers?

The question is:

Why does God need messengers?

That's twice you've tried to change the wording. I don't suggest a third repeat or this conversation is going to devolve very quickly.

What is the tragedy?

All of the inevitable ones, naturally. Are you asking me to doomsay for you? I can't profess any divine authority to do so, I just use experience and intuition. I hope that doesn't diminish it for you.

Note: I had to reduce some of your posts to fit the 12k. If I've cut something out that is of relevance please know it is unintentional.

 

[Trailblazer]

How do you think it's "prudent and beneficial" to delay sex until marriage? It seems to me that the opposite is true.

That is not what studies show.
Virginity And Marriage: Study Shows The Later You Have Sex, The Better Your Relationships Are

Sex is an important component of a married relationship; if spouses go into a marriage with no sexual experience at all, then that component of the relationship - and therefore the relationship overall - will be worse off.

What's the matter, did you never hear of "learning on the job?"
Both my husband and I were virgins at ages 42 and 32 respectively, and we are still married over 33 years later. We kept a sex therapist in business for about a year, but it all worked out, it really worked out.

On top of that, when a person hears negative messages about sex through their childhood and adolescence as their religion tries to steer them away from premarital sex, those negative feelings associated with sex don't necessarily just switch off on their wedding day. Often, those negative associations persist into marriage, creating a situation that's even less healthy than what you would have otherwise.

Negative messages about sex that are instilled by a religious upbringing is a separate issue, unrelated to premarital sex. There is no connection. To say that sex is only for married people is not to say sex is bad.

Religious opposition to premarital sex is some pretty toxic stuff, even if we only consider its impact on married people.

From my point of view, premarital sex is wrong in the eyes of God, but that is not something most people are going to agree with, not even many religious people, but I don't care. I adhere to my beliefs but I "try" not to judge anyone because that is against my beliefs.

And when you combine it with a notion that same-sex marriage isn't "real" marriage, then that toxicity gets much, much worse.

it is stated in my religion that marriage is only between a man and a woman, I do not like that idea.. There are some things I am not going to like, but I accept it because I believe God knows more than I do.

I have no issue condemning the religious teaching of "no sex outside of marriage" as immoral and harmful. In many contexts (e.g. when it's combined with a rejection of same-sex marriage), I would call it evil.

To each his or her own. You are an atheist so there is no reason for you to care what God thinks.
Moreover, I do not take issue with atheists who have sex however they want to, because they have no reason not to. I do however take issue with religious people who say one thing and do another. I consider it hypocrisy to be a Christian, Muslim, or a Baha'i and tout the principles while they are breaking the Laws of their religion, just because they could not control their sexual desires. We all have free will so that is a choice.

 

[ecco]

We can know about gods by studying the origins and histories of gods. When one does this, one finds that all are the creations of man's imaginings.

That is what you find but that is not what I find, or what most people find, given 84 percent of the world population has a faith and those faiths all have some kind of Founder, what I refer to as a Messenger of God who brought a revelation from God.

I was not talking about "messengers" or prophets. I was talking about gods.

Probably close to 100% of people believe "other" gods are not real - only their God is the real one.

You may honestly believe that the god you worship is the same god as Baptists, Catholics and Mormons et al worship. But I'd be willing to bet that most Baptists, Catholics and Mormons et al believe the god you worship is a false god because your "messenger" is a false prophet.

Going back in history we had gods like Zeus, Apollo, Mujaji, Kahōʻāliʻi. Are these real gods or were they just the creations of man's imaginings?

Getting back to your 84%...The vast majority of people believe all (other) gods are just a creations of man's imaginings. I am saying they are right.

 

[Trailblazer]

I found an interesting article on the role of religion in counseling. It must be a difficult balancing act. The Role of Religion in Counseling | CounselingPsychology.org

Thanks. I have saved that link and will take a look at it as soon as I have time...
Unfortunately or not, I started a new thread yesterday, so now I am going to get even further behind on my to do list...

But just off the top of my head, I do not think that counselors should bring God or religion into counseling, not unless they have designated themselves as a Christian counselor, for example. If people want a Christian counselor, they can choose to go to one, but otherwise I do not think that religion should be part of counseling, not unless the client wants to talk about it. The worst thing would be if a counselor mentions God or religion unsolicited.

 

[ecco]

But it is not just sex that is the fall guy, it is what it represents. It represents our selfish desires,

Unfortunately, the answers are not so simple...
No, that is not selfish, not unless the reason one is doing so is to get something back.

It might be selfish, but not necessarily.

It might be selfish, but not necessarily.

These comments are quite different from your initial blanket condemnation - "It represents our selfish desires".

Really, what it boils down to is the wants and needs of both parties and that has to be worked out between them. I do not think it is selfish for one of them not to want to be engaged in any kind of sexual activity if it is unwanted, at any age.

It is just as selfish as the other party insisting on having sex.

I have a funny story to tell you that my husband likes to tell about his Great Aunt Carrie. ... On the night of her honeymoon, Aunt Carrie locked herself in the bathroom and she had her husband promise that under no circumstances whatsoever would they ever have sex.

That is not a funny story. That is beyond sad.

It was really selfish and deceitful of her. She should have discussed this with her intended before they got married.

It also puts to lie your earlier comments that there are no reasons to engage in premarital sex.

 

[Trailblazer]

1. And what's the purpose and reason for Gods' existence in the first place?

I could go on and on about that, but since I am on the run with about 20 posts to answer, I will just quote part of a chapter that addresses that question within the context of free will. If you have any questions let me know and I ill try to find time (ha, ha) to answer them...

“Now another question arises. Man is absolutely helpless and dependent, since might and power belong especially to God. Both exaltation and humiliation depend upon the good pleasure and the will of the Most High.

It is said in the New Testament that God is like a potter who makes “one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour.” 1 Now the dishonored vessel has no right to find fault with the potter saying, “Why did you not make me a precious cup, which is passed from hand to hand?” The meaning of this verse is that the states of beings are different. That which is in the lowest state of existence, like the mineral, has no right to complain, saying, “O God, why have You not given me the vegetable perfections?” In the same way, the plant has no right to complain that it has been deprived of the perfections of the animal world. Also it is not befitting for the animal to complain of the want of the human perfections. No, all these things are perfect in their own degree, and they must strive after the perfections of their own degree. The inferior beings, as we have said, have neither the right to, nor the fitness for, the states of the superior perfections. No, their progress must be in their own state.

Also the inaction or the movement of man depend upon the assistance of God. If he is not aided, he is not able to do either good or evil. But when the help of existence comes from the Generous Lord, he is able to do both good and evil; but if the help is cut off, he remains absolutely helpless. This is why in the Holy Books they speak of the help and assistance of God. So this condition is like that of a ship which is moved by the power of the wind or steam; if this power ceases, the ship cannot move at all. Nevertheless, the rudder of the ship turns it to either side, and the power of the steam moves it in the desired direction. If it is directed to the east, it goes to the east; or if it is directed to the west, it goes to the west. This motion does not come from the ship; no, it comes from the wind or the steam.

In the same way, in all the action or inaction of man, he receives power from the help of God; but the choice of good or evil belongs to the man himself. So if a king should appoint someone to be the governor of a city, and should grant him the power of authority, and should show him the paths of justice and injustice according to the laws—if then this governor should commit injustice, although he should act by the authority and power of the king, the latter would be absolved from injustice.But if he should act with justice, he would do it also through the authority of the king, who would be pleased and satisfied.

That is to say, though the choice of good and evil belongs to man, under all circumstances he is dependent upon the sustaining help of life, which comes from the Omnipotent. The Kingdom of God is very great, and all are captives in the grasp of His Power. The servant cannot do anything by his own will; God is powerful, omnipotent, and the Helper of all beings.” Some Answered Questions, pp. 248-250

The entire chapter is on this link, in case you are interested: 70: FREE WILL

 

[ecco]

At age nine I realized that God was pretty much the same as any of the characters in my comic books.

Did you miss this part...
Over the years I learned that different people believed in different Gods.

Did you miss this part...
Over the years I learned that people have always created Gods. It's been a long journey but the truth I came to realize at age nine is still the truth all these many years later - Gods are the creation of man's imaginings.

What happened at nine years old you are not talking about?

Background: My family believed in God but was not terribly religious.

At around age nine they decided they should expose me to religion and sent me to Sunday School. What I mostly remember is the cutsey pictures of Noah's Ark with the giraffes heads stick out. I think I lasted two, maybe three weeks. I recall, very shortly thereafter, thinking "There is no God".

Sorry to disappoint you, but there is no big traumatic hidden event.

I see this is when you closed the doors to the possibilities and started accepting your or someone else's beliefs.

It sure wasn't someone else's beliefs. At that time I was the only person I knew of who didn't believe in god. Knowing that, I kept my decision to myself.

Simply because you can not agree with what religion is teaching or what people are telling you about God does not mean God does not exist.

My atheism does not stem from my agreeing or disagreeing with other people. What have I said that leads you to make that comment?

Religion is mankind's attempt to understand God.

No, actually it isn't. Religion is:

the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.​

-and-

a particular system of faith and worship​

Gods were created in an attempt to explain nature.

Even though many think their beliefs are true and is all they need to know, isn't there always more to Discover?

Show me a Discovery that provides evidence that I am wrong in believing that Gods are the creations of man's imaginings.

AS I see it, the only ones who loose are the ones who stop searching for more knowledge. On the other hand, many do not want to know at all. They are comfortable in their box of Beliefs. This also includes the box of beliefs that God does not exist. Are you Comfortable???

Frankly, that's the same crock line that comes from every mystical belief system. "seek and ye shall find" - "just open your eyes" - "you must open your mind" - "maybe you just don't want to believe" - ad nauseam.

Am I comfortable? Yep, sure am.