What would be evidence that God exists?

[ppp]

You tout such inimical, immature and immoral beliefs.

All the best in life Joe.

Regards Tony

Thanks! As long as it's not what you consider to be best. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

 

[CG Didymus]

I do not think all these are necessarily 100% physical events and will give my ideas in my next response.

So when one draws the sword of the tounge, the result is just the same as drawing a material sword, if submission is not shown to the sword bearer, death results.

I think real people were stoned to death for breaking some of the laws. Just like real people were burned at the stake for being witches. But I don't believe it was necessarily God that made those laws. I suspect it was the religious leaders.

 

[CG Didymus]

Don't you know what the Christians say? We are all sinners.

That is in the Baha'i Long Obligatory Prayer, so you see, Baha'is agree with the Christians.

Thou seest, O my Lord, this wretched creature knocking at the door of Thy grace, and this evanescent soul seeking the river of everlasting life from the hands of Thy bounty.

O God, my God! My back is bowed by the burden of my sins, and my heedlessness hath destroyed me. Whenever I ponder my evil doings and Thy benevolence, my heart melteth within me, and my blood boileth in my veins.

By Thy might! My trespasses have kept me back from drawing nigh unto Thee; and my sins have held me far from the court of Thy holiness. Thy love, O my Lord, hath enriched me, and separation from Thee hath destroyed me, and remoteness from Thee hath consumed me.

These are just excerpts. The entire prayer can be read here: Long Obligatory Prayer

What ever happened to where he said something about noble I created thee why do you debase yourself? So we are supposed to debase ourselves and admit how horribly wretched and worthless and sinful we all are?

Oh and Revelation 19 sounds like when Jesus finally returns defeats Satan. But, there is a glitch. Jesus binds him for 1000 years then lets him go just to destroy him. Take a look and see it you can make sense of it. But other than that, I don't see any more calamities and judgements of God happening on the people of the Earth. And there are more "Woes" mentioned in chapter 18. So I don't agree with the earlier "Woes" being Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

What ever happened to where he said something about noble I created thee why do you debase yourself? So we are supposed to debase ourselves and admit how horribly wretched and worthless and sinful we all are?

As I said to Tony, I did not like what that prayer says either, and I was really angry about it a while back on Baha'i Forums. I never say the prayer because I feel bad enough about myself as it is. I do not feel like a sinner for the reasons we are supposed to feel sinful, but I hate myself for certain mistakes I make, what I perceive as mistakes even though other people don't think they are. I don't think others see them as mistakes because they would not feel guilty like I do, but I just want to know the truth about what happened.

Oh and Revelation 19 sounds like when Jesus finally returns defeats Satan. But, there is a glitch. Jesus binds him for 1000 years then lets him go just to destroy him. Take a look and see it you can make sense of it. But other than that, I don't see any more calamities and judgements of God happening on the people of the Earth. And there are more "Woes" mentioned in chapter 18. So I don't agree with the earlier "Woes" being Muhammad, The Bab and Baha'u'llah.

Okay I will try to look at those chapters, not that I could ever understand the Book of Revelation.
Bear in mind that the woes could mean more than one thing since Bible verses can have more than one meaning, so it is not an either/or. That was just one interpretation of Abdu'l-Baha, but it is not the only possibility.[/QUOTE]

 

[rational experiences]

If a human only knows self, as a human and also consciousness as the same human, then you do.

The problem with theists is that they think for when humans never existed.

And in rationale, there is no such state. Hence those who quote I use theosophy correctly do so. As a human and do not pretend that they are speaking on behalf of any other form or body. Yet lots of humans do.

So a human knows when I did not exist, I am deceased. And hence you are not deceased before you exist.

....................but wait a minute.

Consciousness the actual discussion of self in a realisation, once before I was deceased and I came back.

Which is using information correctly yet it can be used to falsify reality.

Which is what science in Satanism does....to falsify use of pre existing used and applied/designed and used as the Designer, science conditions before. As a human living before in their life.

Where the condition expressed about humans lying came from.

Due to natural realisation of self. I live to survive until I die. I eat food, I drink water, I live in a natural clear and healthy atmosphere. Natural radiating light that is SACRIFICED ITSELF, the gas spirit is why I eventually die.

So I live surviving only because of the clear cold Immaculate spatial heavens, so quantified that discussion, as a human alive telling all stories....and it was not where I personally began from.

A human can only consciously and rationally quote in self presence I am instantly just totally self manifest naturally as a self explanation. And it was considered scientific wisdom, correct use of conscious self explanation and the only actual realisation of using words about self, being one self in one presence supported by one only body historically as one planet as stories.

Not as a string theory. For you cannot exist before your owned self, human scientist the theist thinking upon natural circumstance...or else you would be quoting an animal knew that they would extend beyond their body as an animal to then own a human life. As bio bodies. And you would be proven lying as a scientist theist.

Theology of course was a human highest spiritual ability to tell stories.

It was never the ability to claim I am instant or I am reacted instantly to be here instantly. Another one of science's lies.

Instant for a baby human life, which we all have lived for maybe millions of years is between sperm and an ovary from 2 pre living human being adults.

And if science wants to quote and I know where your 2 human being parents came from....you would be lying, for they do not exist as humans before their own self.

Why the total review in science versus life survival once said, never talk about the dead, inferring to self, for a non present human is a dead human.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Book of Mormon is not a scripture.

Mormons would disagree.

What are the contradictions between the Bible and the Qur'an?

Jesus is god <-> jesus is a human
Jesus got killed and resurected <-> jesus was never killed

To mention just two.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I do not claim I believe it, I SAY I believe it.

And what you believe, is a claim.

You are just trying to turn what I say into a claim

No. You're not understanding.

When you say that you believe X, then X is the claim that you're believing.
When you make claim X, you imply that you believe it (why else would you claim it...)

Hence, a belief includes a claim. Necessarily. Because to express a belief, you need to mention the claim that is being believed.

Hence, you can't express a belief without mentioned the claim being believed.
Reversed, you can't make a claim without implying that you believe it.

A belief, necessarily includes a claim that is being believed.
The claim IS what is being believed.

so you can say I have the burden of proof, but I do not claim anything because I know I cannot prove my beliefs are true.

A belief is the acceptance of a claim as being accurate / true / correct.
Claims have a burden of proof.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A belief does not include a claim.

It necessarily does.

"i believe"
"what do you believe"
"X"

==> X is the claim being believed.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Oh please…. The Bible alone is evidence

No. The bible is a collection of claims.

What is wrong with you atheists?

We value reason? Although I wouldn't call that a "wrong" thing.

How do you explain the Bible?

Same way I explain every single (mutually exclusive) faith based belief, from religions through astrology through alchemy, homeopathy, crystal healings, voodoo, etc etc etc: superstition and makebelief.

Is there any other book like it in the world?

Yes, plenty.

You talk about evidence and you cannot even see the evidence staring you in the face.

Claims aren't evidence.
Claims require evidence.

Sure, the Bible has problems as it was not written by Messengers of God, but it was the closest to the Word of God that we had until the the Writings of Baha’u’llah came along.

This is a claim. Can you support it?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, it is just the truth. I cannot prove that my religious believe are true, not to anyone except myself.

Just like the schizofrenic can't prove to anyone that he really hears voices, except to himself.

Not saying you're a schizofrenic, but the logic behind this, should make you think.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

For my benefit and for the benefit of everyone who believes what I do.

How are nonbelievers faring with what is going on all over the world, in this country? What hope can they have for the future? I feel sad for them.

The problems you mentioned (forrest fires and covid19) that are faced in the world today, are child's play to what humanity faced in the past.

The black plague for example was thousands of times worse. The spanish flu. World wars.

And just like those viruses, this one too will pass (with far less casualties then the other 2 mentioned) and humanity will go on.

Also, that your faith makes you feel "comfortable", is not an argument. At best it's an appeal to emotion, which is a fallacy. Things aren't correct just because they make you "feel good".

 

[Nimos]

Baha'u'llah never said or even implied that His words (scriptures) alone are proof that He was a Messenger of God.

That is what im trying to explain to you, that you are mixing everything together and the moment I point out that each of these individual evidence is very weak. You back off and start to mix everything together.

If we say that X = (the proof that Baha'u'llah is telling the truth.)

Then we are interested in finding evidence that support X, whatever they might be. And we can split these up and look at them individually and judge how well these support X or how bad they support it.

1. If Baha'u'llah himself never claimed that his scriptures alone were good for establishing a proof for his claim. Then we can fairly easy, conclude that this "evidence" does not give us a lot in regards to X. Therefore we will consider this very weak evidence. So im not being unfair here, Baha'u'llah apparently said it himself according to you.

2. His own Self is who He was, His character (His qualities, what He was like as a person, as seen by how He lived His life, from childhood on). That can be researched from various sources. First of all, I don't know what is even meant with "his qualities"? And I can't see how any of his life or childhood is relevant in regards to finding out, whether or not he is telling the truth.

But let's examine this... what "qualities" are we talking about, can you provide these so we can look at how they are as evidence?

3. His Revelation is what He accomplished (His Mission on earth/ the history of His Cause) looking at these four books you mentioned, they are approximately 1700 pages. Im not going to read that. So can you from these books, find the absolute best evidence that you believe support X, and then we can have a look at those, and if we need more we can include those later?

The issue here is what people consider to be evidence, and that has always been the issue. What would you consider sufficient and good evidence?

Good evidence, is when these point only to one explanation being correct.

Let's say that we have we have two hypotheses X and Y, and we are not sure which of them are correct. Therefore we start looking for evidence, so we can figure it out.

Evidence A - Support both X and Y equally... Therefore we can conclude that A is not good evidence for any of these, in regards to figuring out which of them are more likely to be correct.
Evidence B - Only support X and not Y... Therefore B is good evidence that X might be correct.
Evidence C - Seems to support Y and not X.. but there is no real way for us to verify C... so C is still evidence for Y, but they are weak evidence.

And most evidence, if not all, that you present fall in the category of C, because we can't verify that a person's life have anything to do with them telling the truth or not. We can't verify whether a "revelation" does either. But obviously these are presented to us, as pointing towards Baha'u'llah speaking the truth and not some other person. But again since we can't verify whether or not this is true, they are weak evidence. "Person's life" + "Revelation" does not equal strong evidence, but two weak evidence. Does that make sense?

I cannot understand how they ever came to be written, and it is difficult for me to understand how if God would have had any part of them.

Because they were not written to us, but to the ancient people living at that time. Clearly their view on women, children, other people, justice, were very different than how we look at it.

And that in itself is not really a huge problem, because that just tell us something about history... The problem as I see it, is that people today, claim that God is all good, knows everything etc. and yet he still commanded or allowed slavery, women having hardly any rights, allowed parents to "sell" their children, kill them etc. And to me, that is biggest issue religious people have, if they want to make such claim. Because unless the ancient people thought that it was in their right to do these things, they wouldn't have done it. But a God should know, that parents are not allowed to just kill their children or beat their slaves to death, because they are considered their property, it simply doesn't make sense in regards to good. Obviously people tend to throw this aside as it were in the past, which makes perfect sense to do if we look at it historically, because it does not have to apply to us, which is why I said that it is no huge problem in that regard. But when it comes to an all knowing, all good God... then it is a huge problem.

Okay, maybe the Bible is not enough evidence for a skeptic to believe in God, but it is evidence, even from a logical standpoint.

It is evidence, they are just extremely weak. Try to examine how historians work with evidence, if you want a better view of it.

Continue..

 

[Nimos]

Circular arguments are perfectly valid

18th August 2017 by Tim van der Zee

This is absolutely rubbish in my opinion

Let’s see what happens when we rephrase the above argument to the following:

If the bible is true God exists, and, if God exists the bible is true.

While both claims still have the same very low probability, it is now a more coherent – albeit circular – line of reasoning. Is there anything wrong with these arguments because they are circular? No. The circularity does not reduce the validity of these arguments in any way. That is, there is nothing inherently wrong with circular argument, although this does not mean that all circular arguments are valid and/or sound.

First of all this is not a circular argument. Because:

If the bible is true God exists

Let's assume that this is correct. then there is no need to add this:

and, if God exists the bible is true.

because we have already stated that the bible is true, regardless of God... so why do we need God to confirm it again afterwards and vice versa? At best we can see these as two separate arguments, manipulated in a way so it looks like one.

1. If the bible is true God exists
2. if God exists the bible is true. (And this is even wrong, because what God are we talking about, but obviously, if we add "biblical", then fine.)

This is a circular argument, as he correctly state:
God exists because the bible says so, and the bible is true because God exists.

If what Baha'u'llah wrote is true, God exists, and, if God exists what Baha'u'llah wrote is true.

No, again that is simply to manipulate things just as he did...

God exists because Baha'u'llah wrote it, Baha'u'llah is telling the truth, because God exist.

Besides that what difference does it make in regards to figuring out the truth, simply assuming an "if", doesn't give us anything, right?

No, Baha’u’llah was not the only Messenger that ever existed, there were many Messengers who preceded Him.

It doesn't matter how many there were or how many will come after him in regards to what I wrote and what you have told me earlier.

There was ONLY ONE messenger at the time, which were Baha'u'llah... and you said that God ONLY speaks to the messenger... to which I raised the question, of how we would then verify that he was in fact a messenger, when he is the only one that can answer that question, since God is the ONLY ONE that knows the answer and ONLY speak to the person in question.. there is no way to verify it.

I admitted I could never prove that in the OP. I said: Allow me to preface this by saying that nobody can prove that a Messenger received communication from God, since nobody can prove that God exists. As I have been saying in this forum for years, all we have is evidence, and evidence is not the same as proof.

What view do you think that other religions have in regards to God?

Well depending on who you ask obviously, but Christians believe that you can pray to God/Jesus and that they listen, some claim that God/Jesus speak with them etc. The bible also seems to indicate that people can hear God speak to them and not just a selective few.

Take rising from the dead for instance, that can never be proven even tough it s a very big claim.

So do you think people ought to believe that it is possible then, when nothing suggest that it is?

But since they were not the ones receiving it, they have to believe that is what was really happening. Moreover, all we have is what they wrote about witnessing it, since we were not the ones who witnessed it, so we either believe the book God Passes By or not. Do you understand?

I fully understand, either we have faith in it being true or we don't. But again, for me personally, because the bible claim that "Jesus rose from the dead", is simply is not good enough for me to believe it, obviously if other people want to believe that it is true, fine by me.

But it is simply not justified given the evidence to support it, in relationship to the claim being made. Let me stress it, because you missed it the last times i wrote it

Doesn't mean it didn't happen, that is not my argument.. but simply that it is not rational to just accept it as being true.

Fair enough, so maybe there is no way for you to ever be a believer.

I don't know, as I have said before, if God exists then he would know. But if he think that he can convince me with the way he is doing it now, then I think he is wrong... but guess he would know if that is the case as well

But let's be honest here, we are not talking about some insignificant thing here, for many, if not all religious people, their religious beliefs can have a huge impact on their lives. And obviously it would have on me as well, which is why ill rather be sceptical about it, than giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Because im not going to allow my life to be governed by something like this, if it is not unquestionable demonstrated to be true. But again, if others find value in it and believe that it is true, I have no issue with it, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. And unfortunately that is not always the case.

I believe we have one life, no afterlife etc. so I value what life i have and is not going to allow other people to tell me, what is right or wrong, unless they can provide compelling evidence for it being true. That would be to waste my life, listening to people that have no clue what they are talking about purely because they believe something.

So I take beliefs very seriously, because it really affect people. For instant, I really don't get those people that just jump from one belief to the other, like it's just a free for all in the circle of life, trying to find comfort rather than truth.
Truth is what matters to me and to be as honest with myself as I can and believe as few false things as possible.
I don't care, if something sounds good or you are promised whatever you desire, if it's not demonstrated to be true, I will assume that it is not until proven otherwise.

Of course Baha’u’llah had free will. No, God did not foist Himself on Baha’u’llah; Baha’u’llah heard the Voice if God and willingly conceded to serve God for the remainder His life. Of course, the All-Knowing God knew that Baha’u’llah would do His bidding; otherwise God would not have chosen Him as His Messenger.

“Say: God is My witness! I have wished nothing whatever for Myself. What I have wished is the victory of God and the triumph of His Cause. He is Himself a sufficient witness between you and Me. Were ye to cleanse your eyes, ye would readily perceive how My deeds testify to the truth of My words, how My words are a guide to My deeds.” Gleanings, pp. 256-257

But aside from that, it is a moot point whether Baha’u’llah had free will or not. Baha’u’llah had a 'universal divine mind' that is different than ours, and that is why God was able to speak to Him through the Holy Spirit. I do not believe that God speaks to ordinary human beings because they would not have the 'capacity' to understand communication from God.

Will be careful here, is that a claim you make? or did Baha'u'llah not say this either? or where did this universal divine mind idea come from?

Because it's extremely lucky, that only the messenger have this "universal divine mind", so they can be the exception to the rule. which, if im not mistaken, you have mentioned several times earlier in other posts, that God can't speak with us, as it would ruin our free will.

 

[rational experiences]

The Bible quotes no man is God after a total assessment after the fact of evidence is produced.

In 2 incidences of the past using technology involving radiation/radio wave changes to natural Earth seals/fusion. Trans mutation of mass was the ancient science, nuclear resourcing became modern day psyche notified of new fusion information, it was learnt by the Designers of the pyramid/temple technologies as new male realisation.

To know is only identified as having been caused and owned a recorded detail by vision cause.

The book research written as scientific data only applied for humans by humans in the sciences. Humans living on Planet Earth inside of the heavenly gas mass, make these quotes. Which included hearing of voice, which is stated to be ground fission recorded voice/imagery of the God stone. Exactly how it was stated. Man did it, the science/male group.

For not listening to God information that when in use of words told them that their science thesis, machine building and then control would cause them to be life converted/attacked. How it was stated, what was human realised and taught as human realisation, AFTER the fact.

So as God is the spirit out of the stone/gases that cooled to become Immaculate in the spatial womb theme...then were set alight by Sun blasting radiation, converting Earth, the flood, the massive evaporation history. Then God as a spirit term are the Noble gases in the great deep womb/pit of space, sitting upon the face of water evaporation. Moving in a circulating/circular motion.

Explained O G the swirling movement to O, and O splitting by gas burning/cooling changes into a non total loss of D/D and then back to O O, continual constant circulating motion.

The theme teaching, God the spirit of on the face of the deep. As a thought upon mind researched psychic human awareness.

Now if you decided to adapt God the spirit movement, how would you then describe the spirit changed/sacrificed unnaturally in a Satanic God stone released cause from out of the jail/seal of the stone fusion?

You would re name its movement and quote a variable to the movement of spirit in the Heavens, in full aware human mind psyche knowledge that you personally sacrificed the spiritual movement that kept life safe in transmitting radiating gas bodies.

And taught self that status as GOD O changed into O PHI fall out and described the new movement O differently. And quantified that movement to be O split into the J hook, the sine changes to the O top and also bottom O position. A new split of movement....quantifying that at the nose point ^ in time at O position 6 the circular movement of the O previous God gas natural light changed.

That stated to self, radiating spirit gases in a Satanic cause fell out of the Heavenly body as the spatial vacuum natural owner of natural light existing, by its natural cooling. Could no longer cool the gas mass naturally. So it began to fall out to the ground. And life was then ground cell/blood body irradiated in phenomena attacks.

And that movement O was determined by a lettered evaluation as J E S U S.

Proving that circular movement and changes in gas/light converting of the Noble gases is a designed letter ancient science evaluation. As stated to be a psyche notified aware ideal description. That detailed that it was mind noticed that G O D movement in the Heavens was changed by Temple sciences.
The Magical Circle of King Solomon

sine shapes - Bing images

Realisation and psychic awareness as first and original male natural human mind wisdom is real. Science was invented by its human thinker...and the realisation that science was wrong was also mind identified and notified.

PHI was caused by science invention and God the planet stone fused changed how much radiation began to be unsealed and released from its natural MASS, as first/ONE entity Creator of its own heavenly body, as a history.

EVEN...night time Immaculate Holy 12 light gas not burning. Evening.

The science history quotes, man set the night time even balanced sky alight for 7 days of witnessed burning.....seeing natural light is and has been an Earth natural day light constant of 12 hours for a very long time. The only reason to quote 7 days, was that it was known and witnessed as a 7 day cause.

EVEN changed to EVE and the Sine frequency changed as the apple shape SINE cause. Night time 12 hours since has been witness to artificial burning gases by the UFO history since. We knew that science caused that Earth activation, and science also promised us that by the Year 2012 the spatial vacuum would have finally stopped the release and re sealed Planet Earth.

Their promise was a non nuclear alchemical future. And it is obvious that science broke its human promise to never alter God again.

Why do we humans know God came from the eternal historically as a fallen angel O baby body? A spirit trapped within a O circular sound mass? Because when fusion/seal on Earth stone is changed, the evil spirits of the past emerge and we witness their presence. Why we know the story is real.
https://www.reference.com/world-view/bit-apple-first-adam-eve-81995f5003166e41

 

[PureX]

What about love, you believe that it exists? yet it is not an absolute truth, it's a truth which is agreed on.

Love is not truth. Truth is truth. They are different ideals.

I agree, if we don't care about consensus and just want to go with whatever people can think of, then that is perfectly fine. However trying to establish consensus is rather useful when it comes to truth as we can use it to keep enhancing it. That is basically why religions haven't gotten any closer to establishing truth, because they don't really care about consensus. Anyone can pretty much think what they like about the scriptures. Obviously there are some very fundamental consensus within each religion, at least to some degree.

All you're saying is that consensus creates consensus. Meaning agreement. But that has nothing to do with truth. It's just agreement. We could all agree that the world is flat. And it was flat via our limited collective experience and understanding for a long time. Now we all agree that it's spherical, because it is spherical via our limited collective experience and understanding. Sometime in the future we may all agree that it's not properly defined by the shape of it's surface, but by the complex phenomenal dynamics that manifest it. Meanwhile, both all and none of these are "the truth".

Again if we don't care about figuring out what is actually true and what is not. Sure consensus is not needed. But if you are to create a general agreement between people about what is true and what is not, doesn't it somehow naturally follow that we have to convince each other?

The problem is that we label our consensus "true", when in fact all it is, at best, is mutually functional.
Functionality is good, it helps us act collectively to survive. But it becomes a delusion when we presume it to be 'truth', and that kind of fundamental self-deception is often not good for us. It stagnates our imaginations, and drives us to 'protect and defend' our conceptions of it even when they're quite wrong.

I don't claim to know the truth about whether or not God exist. I simply state that, im not convinced or that I don't know, because given the evidence there is to be found or presented to us, that seems to be the most honest position to take.

But your demand for 'evidence' is both biased and arrogant. What makes you think a human could even recognize such 'evidence'? How would we even know what "God's existence" would entail? I, personally, have no idea what such a 'divine' state or condition would be. It would both precede and transcend ANY experience or conception of "existence" that you or I have ever had. If "God" were to show up in front of me right this instant, in some blaze of metaphysical glory, how could I possibly determine that it was, if fact, "God"? Maybe it's some advanced alien species dressing itself up to fit my limited human idea-vocabulary. Maybe it some very clever magician's trick. Maybe it's an hallucination being generated in my own mind. Maybe it's something beyond my imagination, but still not "God".

We humans simply do not possess the ability to verify "God's existence". So demanding that verification be presented to us is, well, bogus.

The only material, if we are talking Christianity, is that the bible tell us that God cares, because he want to hurt, punish or kill those that don't. But it doesn't, as far as I know, explain why it is important for God that we believe?

It's not important to God that we 'believe'. It's important to Christianity that we 'believe'. Christianity is a particular way of conceptualizing God. A conceptualization that involves a need for cooperative consensus. To adopt this particular concept of God, and live by it according to the religion that has been created to help people do that, some mutual consensus is required to achieve the proposed goal. And so THAT particular religion preaches and practices mutual 'belief'.

But the Christian conception of "God" is not God (so far as any of us can know), and religion is not theology (by logical definition). So atheism is not logically defined by an antithetical religious stance or by "unbelief". Even if some Christians say it is.

If religions are very interested in us believing what they say, which it would actually mean, if God doesn't care at all. Then clearly they are wrong right?

The only religion that I am aware of that seeks a consensus of 'belief' is Christianity. Judaism does not. Islam does not so far as I know. Hindi does not. Buddhism does not. Taoism is not even a religion. And the most or many ancient and contemporary 'pagan' religions didn't either. I'm sure there are bound to be some lesser known exceptions, but overall, Christianity is the only one of note. And the only reason it does so is because it proposes cooperative action on the part of 'mutual believers' to achieve an ultimate goal. Many of the same reasons and results as you pointed out, above.

Honestly, I think im being pretty fair towards what evidence is presented to me.

Demanding "evidence" in support of ancient religious mythological stories is just foolishness. And has no relevance to a theological discussion or debate about the nature and existence of God.

 

[CG Didymus]

Sometimes the Baha'i Fund helps to pat for expenses of traveling teachers.
The UHJ members get a stipend to support them while they are in session.

Re: Paid functions in the Faith

Post by brettz9 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 4:59 pm

Hi Nowis,

IIRC, those who serve at the World Centre are offered a stipend but many do not even take or use it, though of course their basic needs are met.

As far as the National Spiritual Assembly in the U.S., my understanding is that the secretary and possibly now one or two other members whose duties are full-time, are compensated comparably to those in a similar organization or business.

Hopefully someone else can provide a more precise answer.

I think a few items may be helpful here:

1. There are no permanent paid teachers of the Baha'i Faith.
2. We do not solicit or even accept contributions from non-members (unless the contribution is for charity to member the public, and even then, I had heard that the institutions are not supposed to be publicizing this or doing this very actively).
3. Our representatives are elected regularly by the mass of its believers.

Best wishes,
Brett

Paid functions in the Faith - Baha'i Library Forum

I do not know about the future, but there are Baha'is who work in National Bahá'í Administrative offices who get paid, and these are advertised and paid full time positions. As I understand it, some of the money Baha'is contribute to the Fund is used to pay these people.

OPEN POSITIONS with the Bahá’í National Organization

https://www.divinegemsvirtues.com/uploads/6/1/4/8/61489781/1-12-17_jobs_poster_2017.pdf

Clergy, Priests, Pastors, Ministers, Imams, Gurus, etc. every religion has names for those with authoritative leadership roles. Some get paid some don't. Baha'is are against a "paid" clergy. But it your leaders don't get paid to do the work of leading, then they are going to have to have paying jobs to support themselves and their families and only do their leadership roles within the Baha'i Faith in their spare time. But I don't think that's what happens. They need to be there on the job for the Baha'i Faith whenever they are needed. And, someday, that might be 24 hours a day. Like Shoghi Effendi I'd imagine didn't have a day job outside of being the Guardian of the Baha'i Faith. So I don't think not paying your leaders is something you can do or should do. They need to be running things. But then what do you do about saying you don't have a paid "clergy"? Define that only as being priests and not other types of religious leaders?

 

[rational experiences]

Science as a male group versus male group interaction, the theist worded storyteller history. To reason to argue for or against science thesis/design. Before formula, designs and building of machines to react....only controlled by the Designer his own self the human.

Quotes as a science life and aware self, I know the correct information in science and I can tell my own self when I am wrong.

Argument with some males....."I know it all he says, I am never wrong".

So science is proven to be a liar in particular life/psyche and beliefs.

Therefore science in the past said, I was self male human life sacrificed because I changed the concept information of the theme about EVEN into EVE.

Status, a story told to his own life, researcher of God O one stone fused information history and what his brothers in science caused a long time ago to Earth. Claims he put the stone hot dense mass back onto the face of Earth, as its beginnings, to re seal the Earth.

So quotes in male memory and psyche, science known facts, I removed stone fusion, made sink holes, but the stone was replaced. Science had the stone seal returned he quoted as a notification. Looking back and researching his first science memories on God O the Earth as a story teller.

I made stone disappear is his reasoning. Hence if he did not think he could put stone back, then he would not own the belief or the male memory quote claiming I did have it caused to be put back. For knowledge, and history, cause already existed first. To quote....I know for God told me.

Meaning the research he applied to God, O one planet, changed and he detailed what the reactions were. Science memories.

Reason, my machine parts are now found inside of the stone fusion of Earth.

Volcanic unsealing, hot dense mass came back out, re sealed the Earth and was cooled fairly instantly. Which means, vacuum reapplied, gas mass heavens changed and water flooding/seal.

If you say, did you brother in science, look back upon information and quote before the giant life lived, due to Satanic one third angel gas fall out caused it....claim and God the male "theist" did it? Yes, it was his own confession. His Father in science history had caused it, the designer of the changes to God. God told him he quotes how to change God, the mass.

We can ask, is the first and origin God O just fused stone in the spatial history? Yes. So it never told him anything rationally. For he was living in the released stone gas heavenly body, talking about a different God condition? Yes, of course.

Science claims I can copy what I research about cosmological creative history. Yet in the God thesis he was inside of the heavenly gas mass not discussing the first God, as sealed stone mass. He discussed the spirit movement of God in the heavenly body burning/cooling.

So quoted, God told me how to do it....meaning the gas history radiating released from out of the body of stone fusion. First realisation, science lied to itself, and said, but God information also quotes, told self not to do it...but would not listen to self. As a human confession. The theme quotes, humans would not listen to the warnings from God. Meaning reactive cause by science change.

The Bible is about science thesis/machine cause change to the state natural and how humans and animals suffered in the attack of radiation fall out, gases radiating falling.

Therefore once, God the O one planet owned a higher fusion of its mass. It owned a larger gas mass heavens and more ground water.

Before EVE was activated to change all of those bodies of mass.

For EVE was also ended and finished.

Change from the higher to the lower was enacted, Earth heavenly spirit gas body changed by science, the man group did it says the documents. Removed from the original Natural support, Garden eviction of all the Nature on O planet Earth the statement.

Today you would ask a scientist did you ever think about what natural original mass changed to own the statement for new sine signals? That is quoted to be caused by the Tree of Life being changed, told in human memory to not eat it? And quotes that new "bites" being the sine signal itself, like wings of a bird were caused? Science would not even know what original Earth and sine was like before science was applied.

Therefore if a huge massive Earth change occurred to support PHI having fallen out and burnt attacked everything to it being stopped........that historical event was not even thought upon. What conditions were lost, and what amount of mass was lost in the conversion/cease of unnatural burning of gas/heavenly mass.

The quote therefore said in the 2 events of a Jesus life sacrificed history, it involved copying science as a thesis/design and machination from history, the God spirit movement in the Heavenly gas mass of Noble gases had been changed.

And twice it was notified to have owned an attack on life and have it mutated and removed. As the similar cause and effect in science converting Earth mass.

Why the Jesus event was linked to the cause history twice, just as original science status as the statement of EVE.

Which correlated the fact that EVEN owned 12 Immaculate hours of non burning gas mass at night and it had been changed and had not been balanced since.

And the confession was that humans did not listen to the advice about God, to never alter the law of the mountain again. As science originally was based on the mountain thesis of a flooded Earth. It had never been cosmological, the cosmology was discussed afterwards in cause and effect reasoning.

The status quoted the Holy spatial womb Holy Mother of God heated to a radiating state of the abomination of life. The claim was that unholy sexual God (stone gas burning release) changed the heavenly spirit. As the spatial womb owned why natural cooled gas light existed. Science changed God the sealed radiation gas and had it released from its Earth seal.

The reason sexual quotes were stated to science as a history was due to the sexual life living naturally in modern return life, evolved, and the baby to adult male self looked back in researched science history to identify first science information when he was not living as a sexual life on Earth. How he could use quotes of space being a womb as a comparison.

Researched after his life returned after the ice age cooling.

The history of first science thesis was about the mountain and flooded earth, not the body of space.

Science therefore told science that science is wrong and dangerous in its choices in life. Just as it always had. Therefore if science owns its history of ignoring its own known science warnings, then everyone should come to the same conclusion, they agree to the destruction of natural life, as if they are not involved in the harm of it.

As a spiritual psyche my conclusion as a theist in healing is an idea that they believe the machine is an extension of their own self, and controlling the machine does not place their life into the conditions of inheriting the attack/destruction of life.

For their psyche knows that they always survive and live past the activated human deaths caused by science conditions. As a self aware memory knowledge.

History says the same circumstance. The original God psyche and spiritual life was removed and sacrificed and became his own recorded human male memories in the atmospheric gas feed back recording. How he came to believe that God was a male spirit.

The conditions of self, and original higher life spirit human male body owner in DNA would be why this situation is known directly to the selves who believe in the information. How they own the prophecy future predictions in science/maths as the encoded life expressed theory ownership. The scientist and the knowledge of his own future intent involving destruction of life in cause and effect conditions.

 

[CG Didymus]

Clergy are different because they have a job they are hired for and paid for. All positions of leadership in the Bahai Faith are democratically elected and not salaried.

All positions of leadership in the Baha'i Faith are elected and not salaried?

In the future, when in a city there might be thousands of Baha'is, there will be no paid people to do the work of running the affairs of the Baha'is in that city? Or, there will be lots of paid staff, but the actual elected leaders won't get paid? And they will have enough time to work a paying job and do their Baha'i duties?

So I asked about the leaders... like UHJ, The Teaching Center, NSA, Continental Counselors, and even travel teachers. They are all doing work for the Faith but don't get paid for it?

It's a material world CG, this really does not need explanation.

It doesn't need explaining?

I have worked on a Local Council for 30 years. All my pay has come from the rates the residents pay, or government funded through taxes.

This will not change. The Spirit in which we give these funds will change. The majority will choose to give as much as they can for the good of all.

Taxes will cover the needs of society as a whole.

Local Council of what? Not the Baha'is is it? But, if it were, and it was a full-time job of doing the work needed to run the affairs of the Baha'i Faith in your community, or country, or the world, you'd need some way to support yourself. Does that money to feed and house you come from the Baha'i Faith? If so, Baha'is that are in roles of leadership are going to get paid. You might not have priests, but you have religious leaders. If you pay them... you aren't that much different than any other religion that pays its leaders.

 

[CG Didymus]

I think everybody is going to have to be onboard, especially the leaders. We can't have leaders getting caught foolin' around like so many Christian leaders have. But then, every Baha'i is going to have to live a life of truth. Right now, Baha'i or Christian, I think there is too much hypocrisy. The believers aren't that much different than us "sinners". The only difference is they go to Church on Sunday and most (or some?) Baha'is go to Feast every nineteen days.

Don't you know what the Christians say? We are all sinners.

That is in the Baha'i Long Obligatory Prayer, so you see, Baha'is agree with the Christians.

Thou seest, O my Lord, this wretched creature knocking at the door of Thy grace, and this evanescent soul seeking the river of everlasting life from the hands of Thy bounty.

O God, my God! My back is bowed by the burden of my sins, and my heedlessness hath destroyed me. Whenever I ponder my evil doings and Thy benevolence, my heart melteth within me, and my blood boileth in my veins.

By Thy might! My trespasses have kept me back from drawing nigh unto Thee; and my sins have held me far from the court of Thy holiness. Thy love, O my Lord, hath enriched me, and separation from Thee hath destroyed me, and remoteness from Thee hath consumed me.

Problem is... I'm talking about the hypocrisy of some people in "organized" religions. They can go to the religious functions, then go home, go to work and live unholy, sinful lives. In other words, be no different than a normal non-religious looking person. But, what are they supposed to be? A light. An example to the wayward. They should reflect the virtues and morals of their religion.

That prayer has been my rock, my solace.

this wretched creature, My back is bowed by the burden of my sins, and my heedlessness hath destroyed me, I ponder my evil doings, My trespasses have kept me back, my sins have held me far from the court of Thy holiness?

So Baha'is have the "noble I created thee" quote and they have this prayer that makes it sound like Baha'is are incapable of being good virtuous people. They will fall short of attaining the "court" of holiness. So, what Baha'is need to do is admit they are sinners, just like this prayer says. Admit that they have a sin nature and pray to Jesus to save them and to fill them with his Holy Spirit. He paid the price. He paid the penalty for you sins. He is Holy and True and will forgive you of your sins if you ask him and commit yourself to letting the Holy Spirit guide you. The choice is yours Tony. All I can do is offer you the Truth.

Anyway, I've got to go to Church now and confess my sins. Boy what a good time I had last night drinking, drugs, wild women. Praise God that he is a forgiving God and understands how wretched we all are.

 

[CG Didymus]

Why would that matter? NEW Guidance has been given by God for this age so people can look at that NEW Guidance.

That NEW Guidance straightens out the confusion and explains why we have it.

Yes, for those that believe that guidance. I don't. I see flaws and discrepancies in some the beliefs and interpretations given by Baha'u'llah and the other Baha'i leaders. Like Abdul Baha's explanation of the "true" meaning of the resurrection. Like Baha'u'llah saying the Bible is wrong and that Ishmael, not Isaac, was taken to be sacrificed.

If none of that bothers you, then great. Become a Baha'i and follow its guidance. But I have another problem. I can't truly follow the strict moral codes of religions like the Baha'i Faith and Christianity. I like to "fool around" once in a while. I'd be no better than one of those hypocrites I was talking about. In the 70's I was around Baha'is and Christians... both of them had problems of people "foolin' around" and other "sinful" behaviors.

If people can't live it, then they are not going to be able to honestly exemplify the religion. Flawed people telling others what the "truth" is? Flawed people in leadership roles? There's going to be scandals. No body is perfect. So how is there going to be peace, justice and unity? You can say, "God with help us be better people"? Then why hasn't he? Religion gives us rules and moral codes we can't fully live by, and then makes us feel guilty for not being able to follow them. So some people say "Forget religion. Unknowable, invisible Gods. A three in one God. Satan. No Satan." Yes it is confusing, because religions make it confusing.