Questions for Atheists and Agnostics

[ecco]

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

Did you actually read that article?

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

So what if Jesus had no wives? the circumstances of His life were very different... Jesus had no place to lay His head, how could be have a wife? Also the "mission" of Jesus was very different from the mission of Baha'u'llalh... The life of Jesus was very short and His Mission was very important and had to be accomplished within a short period of time. Baha'u'llah by contrast came from a wealthy family and He lived into old age.

No, I do not know why specifically why Baha'u'llah had several wives, but to assume that He was catering to His baser instincts is just unjust and unfair, because you do not know... Perhaps you are just projecting.
If you want to know why He had several wives you can ask a Bahai like Adrian because he is very knowledgeable.

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.

What behavior? Do you know what the behavior of Baha'u'llah was?

Again, do you know why he had several wives?

Again, I do not know but I might be able to find out. Adrian on this forum is a Bahai who would probably know.

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

I do not consider it uptight to allow sex only in marriage, but to each his or her own... Sex is only one facet of life, and certainly not the most important one... YMMV.

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?

No, I don't. that was the culture in those days. All Muslim men had several wives.

RE: asexuals

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.

Okay, finally we can agree on something...

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.

Of course He did, but what is your point?

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.

Of course the older religions teach that but they do not delineate the nature of teh soul and its eternal destination the way Baha'u'lalh did. Jews and Christians cannot agree on where they go when they die because it is not clearly delineated in their scriptures..

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.

The Mormons are an exception. There will be no virgins in heaven because there will be no physical bodies in heaven. That was a myth... 72 Virgins in Heaven: Fact or Fiction?

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?

So what? that does not mean that is what Baha'u'llah was seeking. Atheists only make themselves look ignorant when they make statements, facts not in evidence. You are not the only one.

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

Yes they were, but Baha'u'llah wasn't. The differences between them and Baha'u'llah are as easy to see as the sun in Arizona in mid-July. Of course, that requires doing the necessary research.

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".

I know them because I know the history of His Life all of which is well-documented... I also know what He wrote...

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.

Nobody lays guilt on anyone else. If people feel guilty that comes from within themselves. If they think religion is all false and there is no God then they would have no reason to feel guilty.... This is psych 101 stuff.

There is no hypocrisy. We just have religious Laws that apply to the members of the religions. Christians or Muslims might extend those to people outside their religion, but that is not what Baha'is do.

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.

If there was any fault it would lay with God, since God revealed the religion to Baha'u'llah.

If you do not like the tenets of religion, you do not have to follow them. We all have free will.
As I said to Penguin on this thread, I do not judge atheists for any sexual behavior they have; because they do not believe in God, they have no reason to follow any religious Laws.

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

It does not matter what people believe about gods... Beliefs do not create reality.
There is Only One REAL God, the God who revealed all the major religions through various Messengers.

That is my belief but it is also drop dead logical... Why would we need more than one God if God is Omnipotent and Omniscient? Any other kind of god is imaginary.

 

[Trailblazer]

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

That was not a blanket statement. It is only self-ish if it if IS for self.

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

No, I do not agree. Nobody is obligated to have sex if they do not want to. Insisting on having sex when the other partner does not want to have sex is selfish. They know what they can do instead. And if it is a big enough deal they can get divorced.

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

It is sad because she wanted children so badly.

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

I do not know the entire story but apparently her husband was not selfish and cared about her than getting it on.

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

The two are completely unrelated. Maybe they should have discussed it but they did not have to DO IT.

 

[Trailblazer]

Did you actually read that article?

No, I just skimmed it... I did not have time to read it because I have about 20 posts to answer.

I studied sexual behavior a lot when I was in grad school to get my counseling psychology degree; back then I was really interested in sex. But sex is not an important part of my life anymore, not any part of my life... I have more important things to think about, things like God. Nothing is going to happen to me if I don't have sex, but lots can happen to me if I don't have God.

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

“Feed thy people with thy rod, the flock of thine heritage, which dwell solitarily in the wood, in the midst of Carmel.” Micah 7:14.

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?!?!

So what if the message did not reach Him till well into His adult life? Who cares of someone gets the sign immediately? What’s the hurry? God is in no hurry, you are in a hurry.

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

Anyone can believe whatever they want to... Whether it is true or not is another matter.

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?

No, you will never lose free will to choose.

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????

God does care how it turns out but is in no hurry. It has to progress in various stages because humans progress in stages and they do not move fast. It will all turn out in due time.

Just in the first 100 years, the Baha’i Faith went through four successive stages; there have been more stages since then and there will be many more stages before the Golden Age appears.

• FIRST PERIOD: THE MINISTRY OF THE BÁB 1844–1853
• SECOND PERIOD: THE MINISTRY OF BAHÁ’U’LLÁH 1853–1892
• THIRD PERIOD: THE MINISTRY OF ‘ABDU’L-BAHÁ 1892–1921
• FOURTH PERIOD: THE INCEPTION OF THE FORMATIVE AGE OF THE BAHÁ’Í FAITH 1921–1944

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.

God cannot do it in spite of our limitations. God has to work within our limitations. Hypothetically, God could desperately try to communicate to you but nothing would be communicated because you do not understand it.

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?

Yes, but God could be communicating correctly and the communication might not be received successfully by you. That does not mean the communication is a failed communication; it just means there is a problem in reception.

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

The signs are just to let certain people know God exists; they have nothing to do with what God wants to communicate to all of humanity, the message for this day.

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?!?!?

It was written by Baha'u'llah over a period of about 40 years it was made available for everyone to read after that so it was It was communicated in one fell swoop. However, it won’t be received in one fell swoop because humanity moves in stages.

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.

It is successful communication to everyone because God cannot make a mistake in communication. The reason everyone is not successful in receiving the communication is because humans all have free will so they can choose to receive it or not... For various reasons many people are unable to receive and believe the message of Baha’u’llah. Probably the primary hindrance is that most people already have a religion they are happy with so they are not searching or open to a “new religion.” That is very different than they are used to seeing. And as you know, most nonbelievers do not like the “idea” of Messengers, and that is a huge hindrance.

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.

But God is not getting paid for anything. God does not need anything from humans. We are the ones who get the benefit from believing, not God. If God wanted everyone to believe God would make belief free, but ultimately God does not care if you believe except for your own sake.

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.

Your logic is flawed. God is not responsible for your skepticism. Not all people are as skeptical as nonbelievers so that proves that God did not create humans that way. God created humans with free will and a mind to figure things out. Some people are more skeptical than others. God is not excluding you; you are excluding God with your skepticism.

It IS human’s fault that they do not receive the message. The fact that God is omnipotent does not mean God is controlling anything humans do. God does not intervene in human free will choices, so everything that ever happens anywhere for any reason IS a free will decision made by humans. The fact that God is omniscient, so God knows what humans will do, does not cause humans actions; human free will decisions cause human actions.

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.

No, I don’t know the secret life of Sir Doom.

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.

No, God does not do the sifting. God does not make wheat and chaff. We sift ourselves and become wheat or chaff by the free will choices we make; God just knows how it will all turn out because God’s knowledge surrounds all things before during and after they happen in our world.

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.

Essentially that is the way it is whenever a new Messenger appears. In the early days of Jesus there were only a few wheat. People do not become chaff unless they knowingly turn away. People who don’t know are neither wheat nor chaff but have the potential to become either.

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.

I already decided what I was going to do when I posted that new thread about direct communication to everyone.

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.

Sorry, you lost me.

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.

No problem, I had to do that with your post too.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

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

All "the studies" show is that religions that frown on premarital sex also tend to frown on divorce.

What's the matter, did you never hear of "learning on the job?"

What you call "learning on the job" I'd call "the blind leading the blind."

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.

If it worked for you, great, but I'm not sure how you think that refutes my point. You're only one data point.

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.

No, they aren't a separate issue. They generally come as a package deal: to get horny teenagers to refrain from sex takes some pretty serious intervention that generally doesn't just switch off when they say "I do."

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.

I don't care about "what's wrong in the eyes of your God;" I care about the real impact of these sorts of beliefs on real people.

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.

With that sort of thinking, you can accept any injustice.

To each his or her own. You are an atheist so there is no reason for you to care what God thinks.

I have all sorts of reasons to care about what theists think their gods think as long as it people who I care about or me. We would need to marginalize religion quite a bit before it has no effect on me or people who matter to me.

Religious opinions of God's attitudes toward same-sex marriage will only stop being my business once nobody who believes that God disapproves of same-sex marriage has decided to use their vote to make secular law reflect their opinion of "God's will."

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.

There are Christians - and I expect Muslims and Baha'i as well - for whom same-sex marriage is consistent with their beliefs.

As for the rest, though: all three religions also advocate acting charitably toward others, so in a situation where a person has to choose between being uncharitable by opposing same-sex marriage or violating their religion's other teachings to support it, they're going to end up being a hypocrite either way... so they might as well be a kind hypocrite instead of one who throws stumbling blocks in the way of people who are already having a difficult time.

 

[Trailblazer]

All "the studies" show is that religions that frown on premarital sex also tend to frown on divorce.

And so? Do you think divorce is good?

What you call "learning on the job" I'd call "the blind leading the blind."

What matters most is that they get where they are going.

If it worked for you, great, but I'm not sure how you think that refutes my point. You're only one data point.

True, we would have to look at more data points to draw any worthwhile conclusions.

No, they aren't a separate issue. They generally come as a package deal: to get horny teenagers to refrain from sex takes some pretty serious intervention that generally doesn't just switch off when they say "I do."

That is not necessarily true. Children can be brought up to understand that sex is not bad but should be reserved for marriage.

To get horny teenagers to refrain for sex is as simple as instilling morals into them at an early age.

I don't care about "what's wrong in the eyes of your God;" I care about the real impact of these sorts of beliefs on real people.

I don’t expect you to care what is wrong in the eyes of a god you do not believe exists. I also care about the real impact of these sorts of beliefs have on real people. Since I believe in God, I believe that sex outside of marriage has a negative impact on the individual and on society.

With that sort of thinking, you can accept any injustice.

I do not consider it injustice. YMMV.

Who decides what is just? If God exists, God decides. If god does not exist, humans have to decide, so I understand your perspective. Sometimes talking to atheists is like speaking another language because we are coming from completely different premises.

I have all sorts of reasons to care about what theists think their gods think as long as it people who I care about or me. We would need to marginalize religion quite a bit before it has no effect on me or people who matter to me.

Religious opinions of God's attitudes toward same-sex marriage will only stop being my business once nobody who believes that God disapproves of same-sex marriage has decided to use their vote to make secular law reflect their opinion of "God's will."

So far, secular law is on your side, because it does not reflect God’s Laws. Baha’is are required to follow the laws of the land so we support the rights of homosexuals to marry.

You will not get the attitudes to change as long as the major religions such as Christianity and Islam that are against homosexuality put their noses in the government where it does not belong. Baha’is do not get involved in politics except to vote.

There are Christians - and I expect Muslims and Baha'i as well - for whom same-sex marriage is consistent with their beliefs.

I know there are Christians and Muslims who are okay with same sex marriage, and Baha’is have no problem with it either. However, if one is a Baha’i, same sex marriage is not recognized as a marriage, since marriage is only between a man and a woman.

As for the rest, though: all three religions also advocate acting charitably toward others, so in a situation where a person has to choose between being uncharitable by opposing same-sex marriage or violating their religion's other teachings to support it, they're going to end up being a hypocrite either way... so they might as well be a kind hypocrite instead of one who throws stumbling blocks in the way of people who are already having a difficult time.

I agree.

 

[ecco]

No, I do not know why specifically why Baha'u'llah had several wives, but to assume that He was catering to His baser instincts is just unjust and unfair, because you do not know... Perhaps you are just projecting.

No, I don't. that was the culture in those days. All Muslim men had several wives.

All Muslim men? Isn't that the culture your messenger was born into? Do you really think men have multiple wives for altruistic reasons? If you do you understand very little about the nature of men.

I do not consider it uptight to allow sex only in marriage,

Of course you don't. But it is.

ecco previously...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.​

Of course He did, but what is your point?

You commented that during the millions of years that roaches predated humans, your god was pondering how to create humans. I was pointing out that he had all of eternity to figure that out.

The Mormons are an exception. There will be no virgins in heaven because there will be no physical bodies in heaven. That was a myth... 72 Virgins in Heaven: Fact or Fiction?

I'll not bother looking at your link because you seem to have confused Mormons with Muslims.


ecco previously

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?​

So what? that does not mean that is what Baha'u'llah was seeking.

How do you know what his mindset was?

Nobody lays guilt on anyone else. If people feel guilty that comes from within themselves. If they think religion is all false and there is no God then they would have no reason to feel guilty.... This is psych 101 stuff.

But if they are raised in a religious family and if that religion is against homosexuality and they are homosexuals, then there is a lot of guilt heaped upon them by family and peers. That's not psych 101 stuff. That's fact that is easy to corroborate. Many young homosexuals commit suicide because they are ashamed. Most religions, including yours, are guilty of this. I have never heard of atheists heaping guilt on their homosexual children.

Of course, it's not just homosexuality. Religions also dump guilt on people for out of wedlock relations and even masturbation. It's really sick.

There is no hypocrisy. We just have religious Laws that apply to the members of the religions. Christians or Muslims might extend those to people outside their religion, but that is not what Baha'is do.

So you just lay guilt trips on your own. OK.

If there was any fault it would lay with God, since God revealed the religion to Baha'u'llah.

In your opinion. But you really have no way of knowing God spoke to Baha'u'llah. You are just taking his word for it. Like all faithful, you believe it because you want to believe it.

If you do not like the tenets of religion, you do not have to follow them. We all have free will.

Free will has nothing to do with overcoming early religious indoctrination.

As I said to Penguin on this thread, I do not judge atheists for any sexual behavior they have; because they do not believe in God, they have no reason to follow any religious Laws.

Maybe you shouldn't judge anyone for any sexual behavior they have.

 

[ecco]

It does not matter what people believe about gods... Beliefs do not create reality.
There is Only One REAL God, the God who revealed all the major religions through various Messengers.

As you said - Beliefs do not create reality. Not mine, not yours. However, your beliefs create what you consider to be reality.

Realistically, your beliefs have no more basis in reality than do the beliefs of those who believe Nyame or Shiva are the Only One REAL God.

That is my belief but it is also drop dead logical...

There ya go again with the Trailblazer logic. You seem to think if you believe it, it must be logical.

 

[Bird123]

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.

God magic?? I'm not dealing with magic nor beliefs.

your quote:How about this for a suggestion, you are making the claims, how about you validating your claims. My Answer: I have pointed you in the direction by which you can Discover the proof for yourself. Is there a need to wait for me? This isn't about Beliefs. I am not here to convince you to Believe. Burden of Proof rests on the person who seeks the knowledge. Do you seek?

There is evidence of God's actions in Everything. On the other hand, God is a Spiritual Being. Are you seeking physical evidence based on the physical laws of this universe? If you seek real evidence, the only way I know of is to start a journey to Discovery for yourself.

By now you must know the starting point and process that will guide you there. You must realize this will take you much time. On the other hand, you have it easier than I. No one pointed the direction to be. I had to Discover it all. Perhaps that is the best way with no short cuts.

your quote;In 10,000 years plus of god worship literally billions of people have failed to provide evidence for any sort of god. My Answer: No one has provided you with physical evidence that you would not create a belief to the contrary to discount. Can billions upon billions of people be 100% wrong about everything? WE are all Spiritual Beings in our true natures. I have direct experience to this. Perhaps these billions of people deep down realize they are spiritual as well and attempt to Discover God. Since, they lack method as I have pointed out to you, they must rely on Beliefs. Mankind's controlling nature brainwashes many into thinking beliefs are all important and are all true.

your quote: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.[/QUOTE] My answer: You still don't get it, do you. None of these things matter to me. AS I see it, God places knowledge and truth all around us so it can be Discovered. I merely copy God. For those who are ready, it will be a priceless gift. For those not, does seeing truth ever hurt anyone whether they realize what they are seeing? Of course not. Anyone's journey has never been up to me. On the other hand, someone will see the door.

 

[Bird123]

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.




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.



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


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.



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



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.

Every Discovery in science stems from seeking to find, opening eyes to the possibilities, being willing to venture into Undiscovered Country. Let's not forget that Discovery takes lots of work. It's never served up on a plate as Beliefs are. What I have been speaking of has not been isolated in only religion. AS I see it religion is a creation of mankind. God's actions include it all.

Even science started with Beliefs, but they did not stop there as religion has. Further, they correct their errors. Religion does not.This is why I see science discovering God before religion will.

Perhaps, religions were really created by people because deep down they knew we are all Spiritual Beings in our true natures. Can you tell the difference between your physical and spiritual self?

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: No, I don't. that was the culture in those days. All Muslim men had several wives.

ecco said: All Muslim men? Isn't that the culture your messenger was born into? Do you really think men have multiple wives for altruistic reasons? If you do you understand very little about the nature of men.

It is illogical to say that because men have a certain nature that all men have more than one wife for the reason “you think they do.” I will send you another post about the three wives of Baha’u’llah and you can draw your own conclusions.

Trailblazer said: I do not consider it uptight to allow sex only in marriage,

ecco said: Of course you don't. But it is.

It isn’t uptight just because you say it is. That is nothing but a personal opinion, to which you have a right.

Uptight: anxious or angry in a tense and overly controlled way. https://www.google.com/search

There is no “reason” to think that anyone is uptight just because they do not believe in sex outside of marriage.

ecco previously...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.

Trailblazer said: Of course He did, but what is your point?

ecco said: You commented that during the millions of years that roaches predated humans, your god was pondering how to create humans. I was pointing out that he had all of eternity to figure that out.

I do not know if God was pondering. Maybe God was just waiting for when the time was right to create humans. Hell if I know, God’s actions are far above my pay grade.

How do you know what his mindset was?

By reading about Him, according to documented history, people who knew Him personally. That is documented in The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volumes 1-4, cover the 40 years of His Mission, from 1853-1892. The ministry of Baha'u'llah from1953-1892, is covered in God Passes By.

But if they are raised in a religious family and if that religion is against homosexuality and they are homosexuals, then there is a lot of guilt heaped upon them by family and peers. That's not psych 101 stuff. That's fact that is easy to corroborate. Many young homosexuals commit suicide because they are ashamed. Most religions, including yours, are guilty of this. I have never heard of atheists heaping guilt on their homosexual children.

No, you do not know that Baha’is shame their children if they are homosexuals.

Of course, it's not just homosexuality. Religions also dump guilt on people for out of wedlock relations and even masturbation. It's really sick.

Nobody dumps guilt on anyone else. We are all responsible fro our own feelings. If someone feels guilty about sex, they cannot blame anyone else. Even if children were raised that way they can break free later.

So you just lay guilt trips on your own. OK.

No, we do not lay guilt trips on anyone, we just have Laws. Moreover, there is no reason to think that any Baha’is feel guilty. If they break a Law they might feel guilty but that is appropriate guilt, because they are going against the Laws if their own religion.

In your opinion. But you really have no way of knowing God spoke to Baha'u'llah. You are just taking his word for it. Like all faithful, you believe it because you want to believe it.

Of course I cannot know for certain anything that God did, not in an objective way... But I do know that God spoke to Baha’u’llah because of all the evidence that indicates that, without having to be there when Baha’u’llah got His Revelation. There were witnesses to His Revelation but even they could not know that God was speaking to Baha’u’llah, only Baha’u’llah and God knew.

I certainly did not take “His Word” for it. If that is all I had, it would be circular reasoning to believe in Him... I looked at all the categories of evidence I posted to you on the other thread.

It is illogical to assume that all believers believe in a religion just because they want to, because there can be other reasons, and that might not even be one of the reasons.

You are certainly wrong about my “wanting to believe it.” For about 42 years I did not want to believe it and I turned by back on the Baha’i Faith almost completely. But about five years ago, I decided I was ready to come back and take it seriously.

Free will has nothing to do with overcoming early religious indoctrination.

Yes it does; because we know that most people have overcome it that means that it is possible to overcome it. There are much worse things than feeling guilty about sex.

Maybe you shouldn't judge anyone for any sexual behavior they have.

Who says I do? I do have an issue with people who do not practice what they believe but if I judge them it is my issue to overcome. I would never shame anyone over their behavior but I have a right to have an opinion about it and it would be dishonest if I said I thought hypocrisy was good behavior.

 

[Trailblazer]

As you said - Beliefs do not create reality. Not mine, not yours. However, your beliefs create what you consider to be reality.

No, my beliefs do not create reality. Reality just is. I just believe I have discovered it. I could be wrong but I am 100% sure I am right. That does not mean I am right, I am either right or wrong. I’ll find out later after I die, or not find out anything at all. I am not the least bit worried.

Realistically, your beliefs have no more basis in reality than do the beliefs of those who believe Nyame or Shiva are the Only One REAL God.

Realistically, my beliefs have more basis in reality than do the beliefs of those who believe Nyame or Shiva are the Only One REAL God because my beliefs have good evidence to support them. The fact that they are tied into by all the previous major religions is no small thing. Moreover, my beliefs can be true at the same time that the older religions can be true. No other religion can say that.

There ya go again with the Trailblazer logic. You seem to think if you believe it, it must be logical.

I said “That is my belief but it is also drop dead logical...” I NEVER said that or even insinuated that my belief is logical because I believe it. Nothing is logical because I believe it. That is exactly what this atheist I have been posting to on another forum thinks. He thinks that something is logical just because he says so and he has nothing to support his arguments except a personal opinion. I have now posted four threads on this forum to get opinions from other atheists and he won’t even consider opinions of other atheists because he is so sure he is right about everything...

For over three years he has been repeating the mantra that if god existed, god would communicate directly with everyone, to all 7.44 billion people in the world... God is obligated to communicate directly with everyone because a real Messenger of God cannot be distinguished from all the messengers who represented imaginary gods. He cannot even understand how utterly illogical that is on its very face, to dictate to an Omnipotent/Omniscient God how it should communicate with humanity. It is incredible.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

All Muslim men? Isn't that the culture your messenger was born into? Do you really think men have multiple wives for altruistic reasons? If you do you understand very little about the nature of men.

It also appears this comment was made without the knowledge why it was neccessary at times to have multipul wives.

Also your comment on the nature of men is not applicable to all men and is not appropriate, just as it would not be appropriate to make such comments about women.

Peace be with you

 

[Trailblazer]

Even science started with Beliefs, but they did not stop there as religion has. Further, they correct their errors. Religion does not.This is why I see science discovering God before religion will.

Religion did not stop anywhere; religion is the continuous unfolding of revelation from God to man... The tide of God’s mercy that comes through the Messengers of God to humanity will never cease from flowing.

God is inerrant so God does not make errors. Followers of religion are human so they can and do make errors. That is what we see happened in all the older religions. We are trying to prevent the same things from happening in the Baha’i Faith. Because we understand what went wrong in the older religions, we can head it off at the pass.

Science will never discover God. Religion will never discover God. Nobody will ever discover God.

Perhaps, religions were really created by people because deep down they knew we are all Spiritual Beings in our true natures. Can you tell the difference between your physical and spiritual self?

Religions were originally revealed by God through Messengers and then people messed them up over time, like people mess up a pristine lake by swimming around in it for a long time.

 

[Trailblazer]

All Muslim men? Isn't that the culture your messenger was born into? Do you really think men have multiple wives for altruistic reasons? If you do you understand very little about the nature of men.

Below is the article I promised you about the wives of Baha'u'llah.

Wives of Baha'u'llah
by / on behalf of Universal House of Justice
1995-10-23

Dear ...,

...[personal advice deleted]...

Regarding the wives of Bahá'u'lláh, extracts from letters written on behalf of the beloved Guardian set this subject in context. They indicate that Bahá'u'lláh was "acting according to the laws of Islám, which had not yet been superseded", and that He was following "the customs of the people of His own land":

...as regards Bahá'u'lláh's marriage it should be noted that His three marriages were all contracted before He revealed His Book of Laws, and even before His declaration in Baghdád, at a time when Bahá'í marriage laws had not yet been known, and the Revelation not yet disclosed.
(25 May 1938 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

Bahá'u'lláh had no concubine, He had three legal wives. As He married them before the "Aqdas" (His book of laws) was revealed, He was only acting according to the laws of Islám, which had not yet been superseded. He made plurality of wives conditional upon justice; 'Abdu'l-Bahá interpreted this to mean that a man may not have more than one wife at a time, as it is impossible to be just to two or more women in marriage.
(11 February 1944 to an individual believer)

...Bahá'u'lláh married the first and second wives while He was still in Tihrán, and the third wife while He was in Baghdád. At that time, the Laws of the "Aqdas" had not been revealed, and secondly, He was following the Laws of the previous Dispensation and the customs of the people of His own land.
(14 January 1953 to an individual believer)

The three wives of Bahá'u'lláh were:

Nawáb (Asíyih Khánum): married some time between 24 September and 22 October 1835; died 1886; seven children.

Mahd-i-'Ulyá (Fátimih Khánum): born 1828; married 1849; died 1904; six children. She broke the Covenant after the Ascension of Bahá'u'lláh as did all her children. See God Passes By (Wilmette: Bahá'í Publishing Trust, 1987), chapter 15.

Gawhar Khánum: married in Baghdád; died during the Ministry of 'Abdu'l-Bahá; one child. She and her daughter both broke the Covenant after the Ascension of Bahá'u'lláh. See God Passes By, chapter 15.

On the subject of monogamy, it is stated in note 89 of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas:

Polygamy is a very ancient practice among the majority of humanity. The introduction of monogamy has been only gradually accomplished by the Manifestations of God. Jesus, for example, did not prohibit polygamy, but abolished divorce except in the case of fornication; Muhammad limited the number of wives to four, but making plurality of wives contingent on justice, and reintroducing permission for divorce; Bahá'u'lláh, Who was revealing His Teachings in the milieu of a Muslim society, introduced the question of monogamy gradually in accordance with the principles of wisdom and the progressive unfoldment of His purpose. The fact that He left His followers with an infallible Interpreter of His Writings enabled Him to outwardly permit two wives in the Kitáb-i-Aqdas but uphold a condition that enabled 'Abdu'l-Bahá to elucidate later that the intention of the law was to enforce monogamy.

On page 39 of A Synopsis and Codification of the Kitáb-i -Aqdas it is stated that "Plurality of wives is forbidden." The note explaining this appears on page 59 and states:

The text of the Aqdas upholds monogamy, but as it appears also to permit bigamy, the Guardian was asked for a clarification, and in reply his secretary wrote on his behalf: "Regarding Bahá'í marriage; in the light of the Master's Tablet interpreting the provision in the Aqdas on the subject of the plurality of wives, it becomes evident that monogamy alone is permissible, since, as 'Abdu'l-Bahá states, bigamy is conditioned upon justice, and as justice is impossible, it follows that bigamy is not permissible, and monogamy alone should be practised."

The House of Justice assures you that it will pray in the Holy Shrines for your guidance as you consider the many important decisions which face you at this stage in your life.

Sincerely,
For Department of the Secretariat

Wives of Baha'u'llah

 

[ecco]

It is sad because she wanted children so badly.

I do not know the entire story but apparently her husband was not selfish and cared about her than getting it on.

The two are completely unrelated. Maybe they should have discussed it but they did not have to DO IT.

Yeah, she was utterly dishonest and selfish. Maybe they did discuss it and she lied. One has to wonder what would make a person so deceitful.

How did she expect to have kids if she wouldn't have sex?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And so? Do you think divorce is good?

I think it's better than being miserable in a loveless marriage.

What matters most is that they get where they are going.

True, we would have to look at more data points to draw any worthwhile conclusions.

If that's what you think, why have you already drawn your conclusions?

That is not necessarily true. Children can be brought up to understand that sex is not bad but should be reserved for marriage.

I'm more interested in the practical truth as it exists right now, not with hypothetical fantasies about what you wish would happen.

To get horny teenagers to refrain for sex is as simple as instilling morals into them at an early age.

"Instilling morals" has more to do with encouraging love and respect for LGBTQ people than it does with following your arbitrary rules.

I don’t expect you to care what is wrong in the eyes of a god you do not believe exists. I also care about the real impact of these sorts of beliefs have on real people. Since I believe in God, I believe that sex outside of marriage has a negative impact on the individual and on society.

Because you expect God to inflict real punishment on gay people?

I do not consider it injustice. YMMV.

Who decides what is just? If God exists, God decides. If god does not exist, humans have to decide, so I understand your perspective. Sometimes talking to atheists is like speaking another language because we are coming from completely different premises.

You just said, effectively, that you'll violate your own conscience if you can be convinced that it's "God's will." You've abdicated moral responsibility for your positions.

So far, secular law is on your side, because it does not reflect God’s Laws. Baha’is are required to follow the laws of the land so we support the rights of homosexuals to marry.

But you just said you didn't. And it doesn't violate any law to work to change the law.

You will not get the attitudes to change as long as the major religions such as Christianity and Islam that are against homosexuality put their noses in the government where it does not belong. Baha’is do not get involved in politics except to vote.

Voting is enough. If through your vote, your religion impacts me, then your religion is my business.

I know there are Christians and Muslims who are okay with same sex marriage, and Baha’is have no problem with it either. However, if one is a Baha’i, same sex marriage is not recognized as a marriage, since marriage is only between a man and a woman.

So you do have a problem with same-sex marriage, then.

I agree.

You agree that it's hypocritical not to support same-sex marriage? Really?

 

[ecco]

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

Did you actually read that article?

No, I just skimmed it... I did not have time to read it because I have about 20 posts to answer.

That's a really lazy and dishonest way to have a discussion - see a headline, believe it supports your point of view, post a link and hope the readers will not take the time to actually read the article.

Well, sometimes I do read the articles. Often I find that the article does not really support what the poster thought it would. That was true in this case.

But I'll lessen your burden. I have no desire to continue wasting my time with you.