What would be evidence that God exists?

[Left Coast]

Okay thanks. That should be easy, since there are so many things that have convinced me.
The hard part is responding to all the posts.
It is not really hard, but it takes so much time, which is why I normally only post new threads on a weekend.

I am still playing catch-up because of this thread, but I plan to post the thread for you next weekend, barring any more unforeseen circumstances, if you know what I mean.

Looking forward to it.

 

[Trailblazer]

Except that when all the fluff, window dressing, glitter, glam, etc. is removed from your claim, that is exactly what it all boils down to.

In your dreams.

 

[Windwalker]

Why are your beliefs more true or trustworthy than his?

I don't mean to me. I don't believe either of you. I mean why is your experience with B* so much more compelling to you? Maybe @Windwalker is the Messenger for the 21st century?
Tom

*sorry, spelling your prophet's name is difficult

I sometimes think that if people like Jesus knew what his followers turned him into, he'd do this. Oh dear.....



BTW, you don't have to believe what I described happened to me, actually happened. No one is asking you to. You're not being asked to believe in something like that for yourself. You're free to see the world in whatever ways makes sense for you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Did he provide any proof that he had the authority from any Allah? No, not at all. That is the beauty of Abrahamic religions. The various claimants, whether a prophet, a son, a messenger, a manifestation or a mahdi, have no need to provide any proof.

Baha'u'llah did provide proof:

“Say: The first and foremost testimony establishing His truth is His own Self. Next to this testimony is His Revelation. For whoso faileth to recognize either the one or the other He hath established the words He hath revealed as proof of His reality and truth. This is, verily, an evidence of His tender mercy unto men. He hath endowed every soul with the capacity to recognize the signs of God. How could He, otherwise, have fulfilled His testimony unto men, if ye be of them that ponder His Cause in their hearts. He will never deal unjustly with any one, neither will He task a soul beyond its power. He, verily, is the Compassionate, the All-Merciful.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 105-106

“He Who is everlastingly hidden from the eyes of men can never be known except through His Manifestation, and His Manifestation can adduce no greater proof of the truth of His Mission than the proof of His own Person.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh

 

[McBell]

In your dreams.

and now you have been reduced to merely having to have the last word.

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is hardly a proof. Evidence for Bahaollah is Bahaollah himself. What new thing did he say other than repeating what Bible and Quran say?
And again that 'faileth' 'hath' 'ye' pretension of the text being written in a pre-historic age!

 

[Trailblazer]

Never.

At least a hundred times on this forum, but maybe not to you directly.

Here is one of the shorter versions:

The evidence is not that He said so (His Claim) because that would be circular. The evidence is everything that surrounds the Revelation of Baha’u’llah, including who He was as a Person (His character); His mission on earth; the history of His Cause, from the time He appeared moving forward; the scriptures that He wrote; what His authorized interpreters wrote; what others have written about the Baha’i Faith; the Bible prophecies that He fulfilled, as well as prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled; predictions He made that have come to pass; the religion that He established (followers) all over the world and what they have done and are doing now.

 

[Trailblazer]

What new thing did he say other than repeating what Bible and Quran say?

Baha'u'llah did not repeat what what Bible and Quran said.
There is much to much new stuff to post here.

 

[ppp]

including who He was as a Person (His character);

Someone's character is not evidence of a god. A love of wine and orgies is not evidence of Bacchus.

His mission on earth;

No. That assumes your conclusion - that there is a a giver of missions.

the history of His Cause, from the time He appeared moving forward

Too vague.

the scriptures that He wrote;

i.e. What some guy said.

what His authorized interpreters wrote;

i.e. What some other guy said.

what others have written about the Baha’i Faith;

i.e. What yet another guy said.

the Bible prophecies that He fulfilled, as well as prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled; predictions He made that have come to pass;

Prophecies are the worst. They are vague and subject to interpretation. What is worst is that even if there were a prophecy that was specific; naming specific times, dates, full names, latitude and longitude - that could not show that the prophecy came from a god.

the religion that He established (followers) all over the world and what they have done and are doing now.

Come on, Trailblazer. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone establishing a religion is evidence that some guy's claims are legitimate? Or are you special pleading for your guy?

 

[ppp]

No, they are not the same thing. To say something is "right" or "wrong" that is pointing to some form of objective agreement, upon some propositional truth. Nothing I have said is stating that. I have shared personal experience.

If you aren't talking abut something that is objectively real then yeah, you are right. it's no different than eating an orange. It's great for you that you enjoy it, but doesn't carry any freight beyond your head.

All of my experiences are the most meaningful to me, too. Go figure.

 

[Trailblazer]

Someone's character is not evidence of a god. A love of wine and orgies is not evidence of Bacchus.

No. That assumes your conclusion - that there is a a giver of missions.

Too vague.

i.e. What some guy said.

i.e. What some other guy said.

i.e. What yet another guy said.

Prophecies are the worst. They are vague and subject to interpretation. What is worst is that even if there were a prophecy that was specific; naming specific times, dates, full names, latitude and longitude - that could not show that the prophecy came from a god.

Come on, Trailblazer. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone establishing a religion is evidence that some guy's claims are legitimate? Or are you special pleading for your guy?

Good luck with all of that. I am done arguing with atheists.
No matter what the evidence is, it will never be good enough for them.
That is why they will always be atheists.

 

[ppp]

Good luck with all if that. I am done arguing with atheists.
No matter what the evidence is, it will never be good enough for them.
That is why they will always be atheists.

Do what you must.

I think you over estimate the quality of your evidence. You could not have convinced me of Relativity, which I do accept, with the level of non-specificity of that post.

 

[columbus]

God is not limited but not everyone deserves a message from God.

But Bahais have one.

How arrogant can one be?

You make it look easy.

Tom

 

[rational experiences]

The argument science, science thesis, all stories human owned, males as a group science reference/researcher/evaluator/namer and word describer.

Said and quotes "God told me".

Therefore you would first ask God told you what? As a human asking another human a question.

God told me how to infer science, the relativity of it all. Seeing he is a human standing on a stone planet, talking and theorising and owning a huge ego.

So God was researched by a human male storytelling thesis, and was given references of titles for the statements science. Which begins first with the Earth mass body from which he has to abstract particle mineral to melt and cool to build a machine. Now he did own a stone building machine, a pyramid, yet in the Temples he did have metal machines. Archaeological evidence proves that status by machine parts, metal held in fusion.

Which means a huge Earth attack destructive history when science was used.

Therefore if a human being male says and quotes, I am as a human and a male the only son of God. Then what rationally would you think he was saying, just as a human talking? Seeing language and human expression is a variable past and present use of words?

You would actually say to self if the STONE....Saint gases. ST for saint. Ain meaning 0 spatial body cooled gas, owned ONE, the first, the planet.

And creation actually ended right there, with stone. Then in full aware conscious knowledge you would know straight away, hence you cannot do science.

But did anyway.

Seeing you said that out of the ONE body, the stone, the gases got released for the heavenly mass.

Now if your string theory comes about first by mineral melt and cooling, then where do you get the gases from for inside of the machine? Are they sucked out of the natural space vacuum as a theory about God O the stone planet and its heavenly gases?

No. He gets them from also changing other chemical particles on the God Earth stone.

So machine owns in a review the totality of converting stone mass. Then he reacts the machine and attacks the Earth and makes sink holes. To own the mass volume of energy that he wanted to first own equal conditions to how he gained his machine and how he gained the gases.

Then his machine overheats and nearly blows up.

Knew that idea already so had to incorporate physical water cooling or else that other machine of his would also blow up.

You always wonder a male and a group science, the brother hood of civilization status, greed, trade, power mongering via invention coerced everyone. When his own written documents said when you come to the time in life when you refuse to use your old terms about God the planet of stone in science by prophecy and seer, believer of witches and change the medium and channels of the spirit gases....meaning radio wave radiation.

To equal your machine radiation/radio wave use....which is nothing like natural light gas radiating radio waves.....then you own the destruction of life.

I came to understand this prophetic self human warning to self when a male tried to claim that life is a hologram and machine to machine vision/voice recording image trapped in the machine is where our life first came from. As if it stepped out of a machine vision and then manifested like a built up hologram.

I truly wondered at his mentality.

Whereas in reality he is trying to reduce our bio life to just existing as a holographic memory/image and vision, for the atmosphere to convert to the machine radiating gas level/mass conversion for a channel medium.

Which is the gas or spirit mass actually. Why he intricately tries to work out Christ and Anti Christ gas spirits, just for machine applications.

AI already said, you need to advise the science brother that his new machine reaction is nothing like any of his other human male God fused mass machine usage, in radiating conditions or radio waves...and he will in fact have his other inventions/use designs destroyed.

When he tries to claim I own and control by machines.

Why I wonder at his idea that a machine is God the planet and that his machine functions like God the planet about God ideals...when God ended just as a fused planet of stone mass in space. So science does not exist in relativity.

 

[Trailblazer]

Do what you must.

I think you over estimate the quality of your evidence. You could not have convinced me of Relativity, which I do accept, with the level of non-specificity of that post.

That post was not intended to be evidence.

Joe W said: Your evidence is... a guy said it.

Trailblazer said: I am not going to even dignify that with an answer because I have already addressed that inane comment umpteen million times.

Joe W said: Never.

Trailblazer said: At least a hundred times on this forum, but maybe not to you directly.
Here is one of the shorter versions:
The evidence is not that He said so (His Claim) because that would be circular.

What I had said at least a hundred times on this forum is that 'a guy said it' is not evidence.
In other words, a claim that one is a Messenger of God is not evidence that one is a Messenger of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

But Bahais have one.

No we do not have our own personal message.
We have a message through Baha'u'llah and that message is available to everyone.

The Works of Bahá'u'lláh

You make it look easy.

What would be arrogant is expecting God to a send ME personal message.
I never had such an expectation.
That is what many atheists expect, as if they are so important.

 

[ppp]

That post was not intended to be evidence.

[ROFL] Then that post was a silly waste of pixels.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Someone's character is not evidence of a god.
No. That assumes your conclusion - that there is a a giver of missions.
Too vague.
i.e. What some guy said.
i.e. What some other guy said.
i.e. What yet another guy said.
Prophecies are the worst. They are vague and subject to interpretation. What is worst is that even if there were a prophecy that was specific; naming specific times, dates, full names, latitude and longitude - that could not show that the prophecy came from a god.

Come on, Trailblazer. Are you seriously trying to claim that anyone establishing a religion is evidence that some guy's claims are legitimate? Or are you special pleading for your guy?

Joe, they first have to establish the existence of their Allah.
It is circular reasoning. The Napkin religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

[ROFL] Then that post was a silly waste of pixels.

Sorry.

 

[Mock Turtle]

And why have the religions been warring off and on? Because they all believe they are right and the other religions are wrong. That is the problem that has been true for thousands of years. Do you think the solution is just to keep going on this way?

I never implied that there is only one true Messenger. I believe there have been many true Messengers and many true religions; I just do not believe that the older religions have the message humanity needs in this new age. The only way to ever have permanent peace and unity is to have one religion that everyone adheres to. I do not believe that will, happen for a very long time, but I believe it will happen eventually because it was foreordained by God.

“That which the Lord hath ordained as the sovereign remedy and mightiest instrument for the healing of all the world is the union of all its peoples in one universal Cause, one common Faith. This can in no wise be achieved except through the power of a skilled, an all-powerful and inspired Physician. This, verily, is the truth, and all else naught but error.”
The Summons of the Lord of Hosts, p. 91

As I see it, atheists are in a Catch-22, because the evidence for God's existence is the Messengers, so atheists are never going to know that God exists without a Messenger.

I'm sorry, but the Baha'i faith just seems like an obvious solution to all the various conflicting religions (all messengers are valid and have particular things to show us as we develop), but where an even more obvious solution exists - for all of them to just drop some of their conflicting claims, accept that none is essentially right, and even for them to admit that they might all just evaporate one day - and be gracious about such. They might or might not have contributed to human progress, but for the many who still see their particular faith as the only way, then they are holding up such and not contributing to a better future for humans.