What would be evidence that God exists?

[CG Didymus]

You did read that the laws was about parents having the right to kill their children and that it was about slavery, right?

Anyway, you don't see how people could become slightly confused in regards to the rest of the story?

I see people can become confused, as what is it we are after from these stories?

I would ask, as these are for our spiritual understanding, what is it we are reading into the story, instead of what are we tying to get spiritually from the story?

A lot of these I have not had to think about, as Baha'u'llah offered all the Essence of all the past spiritual scriptures in a small book of meditations.

Thus, to me, all those stories, all the essence of meaning is now in this book.

The Hidden Words | Bahá’í Reference Library

Spiritual understanding? This is the Laws God gave to Moses to give to the people. Hmmm... the spiritual meaning, the essence of what it is saying? Let's see... if your kid is a no good, back talking brat. Have the little %&*# stoned to death.

 

[CG Didymus]

Didnt you say you didn't read the bible?

One end you said (sorry, can't quote) that the bible is irrelevant to you in relationship with bahaullah's writings, then on the other end you quote it as if it stood on its own. Wouldn't it be better to stick with bahaullah's writings?

When you use the bible to those who aren't bahai, they get conflicting messages to those who see contradiction when comparing their teachings and bahai.

Thus as a Baha'i, we see that Baha'u'llah gave a New Covernant and in embracing that New Covernant, we accept all the aspects of the old Covernants, that are the unchanging part of God's Eternal Covernant and acknowledge the aspects that are no longer valid.

Invalid... Jesus' resurrection. Invalid.... Satan. Invalid... The Creation story. The Flood Story. The parting of the sea story... It might be quicker if Baha'i would just tell us the few verses that are valid.

 

[CG Didymus]

I do not hear a lot of people talking about dinosaurs, not as many people as talk about the Bible.

Why aren't more people talking about how Christ has already returned? What happened to every eye will see him? The Baha'i Faith is too easily discounted. Once Baha'is say they have fulfilled every prophecy of every religion, those people in the other religions say, "Bull %&^#". Okay, they don't say that, probably more like, "Holy %&^# what a bunch of excrement."

And how much are the Jews talking about the Bible? It's Christians who think they have the only way, the only truth that are saying what their version of the Bible is true and relevant. They believe we are in the last days and it's their duty to tell all of us to turn to Jesus and get saved. Then you and atheists and people in the other religions question them about what's wrong with their beliefs and interpretations. So all of us help keep the Bible in the conversation.

 

[CG Didymus]

I explained to Nimos the reason why the Messengers can understand God and other humans can't in this post:

#430 Trailblazer, Thursday at 9:13 PM

In the following passage Baha'u'llah explains that God has conferred upon the Messengers of God a twofold nature that other humans do not possess. It is because of their spiritual nature that they can understand God through the Holy Spirit. No other human has that capacity.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. He hath, moreover, conferred upon Him a double station. The first station, which is related to His innermost reality, representeth Him as One Whose voice is the voice of God Himself. To this testifieth the tradition: “Manifold and mysterious is My relationship with God. I am He, Himself, and He is I, Myself, except that I am that I am, and He is that He is.” …. The second station is the human station, exemplified by the following verses: “I am but a man like you.” “Say, praise be to my Lord! Am I more than a man, an apostle?” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 66-67

Which means God can confer the ability to people. He chooses to keep most of us in the dark and dependent on a special messenger. And in the past, that message has always been misunderstood, misinterpreted, misapplied, used and abused by the people that take control of the religion. But that's okay. It was all part of God's plan.

 

[CG Didymus]

In the Bible I see the Messenger is shown in the teaching of the Virgin Birth, even though born of women, they are actually born of the Holy Spirit.

The Bible tells us we must be born again in that spirit and the Baha'i Writings also confirm that we must be born again by the Spirit of Faith.

Regards Tony

Except the virgin birth is probably based on a false and out of context interpretation of one verse in Isaiah. Why reject the resurrection and accept the virgin birth? They both are equally mythical sounding and contrary to science.

 

[CG Didymus]

20 - "If a man strikes his male or female servant with a stick and he or she dies as a direct result, the master must be punished.
21 - But if the servant survives a day or two, the master is not to be punished because the servant is his property.

That's the key right there. Beat them to an inch of their lives then stop. Like Tony says, the Bible is filled with "sure" guidance. Such wisdom.

 

[CG Didymus]

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

Whether you like it or not, the prophecies in the other religions are an important part of what needs to be shown to have been fulfilled by Baha'u'llah. Some just don't work all that good.

 

[Nimos]

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

But the perception of love is, right? What else would you say? If a person told you that they love their dog or pasta... would you say that they are lying and if not are they then telling the truth? Again im not talking about absolute truth here, but agreed on truth. No different than I could then doubt anyone claiming to love God and say that they were lying as well. But i don't do that, do I?

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.

But in order for us to reach an "agreed on truth" that the Earth is in fact more round than flat, we need agreement or consensus... and we get that through evidence. If there is no consensus in regards to what evidence is or ought to demonstrate, then a person saying that the Earth is flat is equally as right as one that say that it ain't. And any evidence that we throw in each others face is meaningless, because we have no general agreement on how and what these should lead to or demonstrate.

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".

Yeah and that might be the case, but it doesn't change anything in regards to what I just wrote. It is still an agreed on truth that the Earth is round. If it turns out that later someone present sufficient evidence that the Earth is in fact flat. Then sure, then that will be the new agreed on truth.

But your demand for 'evidence' is both biased and arrogant. What makes you think a human could even recognize such 'evidence'?

Why is it arrogant and biased, we both have access to the same evidence. You think they mean something other than I do, and we both argue our case for why that is so.

Look, you say im arrogant and bias, but then you write something like this: "What makes you think a human could even recognize such 'evidence'?" and you expect me to not comment on it?

If people are not able to recognize such evidence, what on Earth are the scriptures then talking about? What is the purpose of them, if even those that wrote them, didn't think they were evidence for a God and others would believe them as well? Then you have started a completely new purpose of scriptures, because what are they suppose to do then, if no one can recognize them as evidence and therefore 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.

Are there any indications that those that wrote the scriptures, weren't humans? Why did Paul buy into it, if he had absolutely no clue if it was true or not?

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.

Obviously if you only want to discuss whether the Islamic version is more correct than the Christian one, then I agree.

But if its is a matter of morality and consistency in regards to reality and what it means to be humans, then it is very relevant.

 

[CG Didymus]

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.

Have you ever felt pure and in tune with God... felt his spirit glowing inside?

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,

Who can understand it. That's going to be a problem. I'll see it one way and you'll see it another. Just like with the "Woes"... I see those as bad things coming upon the people. I don't see, in the context of what it says happens during each Woe, how the first Woe is about Muhammad and second is about The Bab. But then one of the "Two Witnesses" is supposed to be Muhammad also? Good luck. Did you say you have that book about Revelation that was written by a Baha'i? Or no?

 

[CG Didymus]

Claims aren't evidence.
Claims require evidence.

The NT claims Jesus rose from the dead. It provides evidence. The disciples testimony of seeing him and touching him. But they're dead now. What if they lied? But Christians say God's Word is true and the NT is God's word, therefore the claim is true.

Hmmm? Okay. Now Baha'is come a long and say that their prophet wrote the truth. And the Baha'i Faith says, claims, that Jesus did not physically rise from the dead. And what do they say to back up that claim? "Well, it is scientifically impossible and, even though God could do it, he didn't." They say.

That's it? That's all religion has? No, they have faith... They trust in the Word... Which essentially means... "Just believe it and shut the %&*^ up."

 

[Trailblazer]

Mormons would disagree.

Of course they would, but so what?

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.

The Bible does not say Jesus was God. Christians say that.

I am not familiar enough with the Qur’an to comment, and please note that there is often more than one interpretation of verses. I believe Jesus died on the cross because that is a Baha’i belief, but I do not believe Jesus was bodily resurrected since that is not a Baha’i belief.

 

[ppp]

The Bible does not say Jesus was God. Christians say that.

"Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:"

" In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. "

 

[Trailblazer]

"Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:"

" In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe. The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. "

Did the Jews Accuse Jesus of Claiming to Be “God” or “a God”?

(To see a titled list of over fifty, two-three page posts (easily accessible) about the Bible not saying Jesus is God, click here.)

 

[TransmutingSoul]

. Why reject the resurrection and accept the virgin birth? They both are equally mythical sounding and contrary to science.

I accept the resurrection and the virgin birth.

I see Baha'u'llah explained them in detail and confirmed the Bible is sure Spiritual guidance.

All the best CG. America is in great danger on many fronts. Those symptoms riple in Australia, but I see in Australia there has been a better level of treatment given.

I will not be offering much from now on.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

And what you believe, is a claim.

Correct, I believe the claim.

When you say that you believe X, then X is the claim that you're believing.

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

The claim IS what is being believed.

A belief is the acceptance of a claim as being accurate / true / correct.

Correct, I believe the claims of Baha’u’llah.

Correct, I accept Baha’u’llah’s claim as true.

Claims have a burden of proof.

That is correct, but I did not make the claim so I do not bear the burden of proof.

Baha’u’llah made the claim to be a Messenger of God so He had the burden of proof.

Baha’u’llah told us how to establish the truth of His claim, what the evidence is.

“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

 

[Trailblazer]

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

==> X is the claim being believed.

True, as I said in my previous post, I believe the claims that Baha'u'llah made.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Correct, I believe the claim.

Correct, I believe the claims of Baha’u’llah.

Correct, I accept Baha’u’llah’s claim as true.

That is correct, but I did not make the claim so I do not bear the burden of proof.

Baha’u’llah made the claim to be a Messenger of God so He had the burden of proof.

Baha’u’llah told us how to establish the truth of His claim, what the evidence is.

“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

That says it all in a nutshell, so that is a great post.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Did the Jews Accuse Jesus of Claiming to Be “God” or “a God”?

(To see a titled list of over fifty, two-three page posts (easily accessible) about the Bible not saying Jesus is God, click here.)

I Have at least 4 x A4 pages full of bible passages that show Jesus is not God.

My mother is a born again Christain, so in the 90's I sat down and read Bible front to back making note where Jesus shows that He is not God.

After compiling all that evidence, I sat down to write the letter to her. After a paragraph or two, I stopped and binned the idea.

It had become so evident that the man Jesus was not God, but as Christ was all we could know of God, that I saw no amount of explanation would change the mind of a person that in no way wanted to see that explanation.

Many are of the that mindset.

Regards Tony

 

[CG Didymus]

Did the Jews Accuse Jesus of Claiming to Be “God” or “a God”?

(To see a titled list of over fifty, two-three page posts (easily accessible) about the Bible not saying Jesus is God, click here.)

Just like Baha'u'llah is a man and also a manifestation. Some verses imply that Jesus is God, like when he forgave a crippled man of his sins. Some in the crowd said that is only something God can do. Then Jesus asked them which is easier... to say your sins are forgiven or to tell the man to get up and walk. Of course the crippled man stood up and walked. Later in Revelation this Lamb, presumably Jesus, is the only one worthy and sits with God on the throne and all that stuff. Since his followers wrote all this, they could easily have exaggerated stories and tweaked some of the things Jesus said to make him into the God/man they later officially declared him to be. But it is impossible to argue or debate the Bible with Baha'is, because they can always say something was not meant literally. But then, like I'm sure the many quotes where Jesus says he is not God, those Baha'i do say are literal. You can't lose.

 

[osgart]

I Have at least 4 x A4 pages full of bible passages that show Jesus is not God.

My mother is a born again Christain, so in the 90's I sat down and read Bible front to back making note where Jesus shows that He is not God.

After compiling all that evidence, I sat down to write the letter to her. After a paragraph or two, I stopped and binned the idea.

It had become so evident that the man Jesus was not God, but as Christ was all we could know of God, that I saw no amount of explanation would change the mind of a person that in no way wanted to see that explanation.

Many are of the that mindset.

Regards Tony

So like Jesus is born of the Holy Spirit and is not God! Wouldn't that still make him morally righteous by nature and absolutely incapable of sin? And yet the Bible is clear that Salvation is only through Jesus and that he is a Lord having done what the Bible says he did.

Also does Bahullah claim to be a manifestation of God and thus a son of God? The Bible refers to Jesus as the only begotten son.