Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean?

[Truly Enlightened]

How do you know it is an accurate description? Have you read other information? Have you read the Baha'i information? They are hoping people like you who are into facts will consider it factual.

Some of it might be factual but what these people do is present just enough truth to fool people into thinking it is ALL true... Those are called half truths. Like saying the Baha'is do not do any humanitarian work, lol. Baha'is do a lot of humanitarian work. The donations to Huqúqu'lláh partly goes to used to equalize wealth across different parts of the world. But since this is something only a Baha'i would know, the people who make these videos which are an attempt to discredit the Baha'i Faith, are hoping the unsuspecting viewer won't look into it any more and just believe their video.

As for the history of the Baha'i Faith, that is a Pandora's Box since it was so tumultuous, so people like this take full advantage in their smear campaign. There is no reason to believe that their version of the history is more accurate than the Baha'i version, and every reason to think otherwise. WHY do you think they make these videos anyway, because they were bored one day? No, it is a deliberate attempt to discredit the Baha'i Faith because they see us as their competition. There is no way such "information" can be objective. However, there is no reason why the Baha'is would present inaccurate information about their own religion, and they know more about it than anyone else.

Anyhow, I will get back to the rest of your post later. I have to go to work now.

What I call accurate is when all unbiased, non-religious, ex-members, and religious and cult historian sites, begin sounding the same. It is the consensus of commonality that indicate certainty for me. When you simply deny without explanation, you are actually confirming my certainty. For example, do some members of the Persian Baha'is refer to other Baha'is as KHAR(donkey, in Persian)? If the consistency of evidence demonstrates that there were 6-7 Black American Presidents before Obama, then I will also consider the evidence for accuracy, not the assertion. I will always follow the evidence. Do you feel that the Baha'i faith is "Iran's gift to the world"? Are the majority of the Baha'i membership still Persians? Do you feel that your role in the Baha'i world is obedience, and to teach others the skills to also be obedient? Or can they question and make their own decisions? I knew nothing about the faith before, but I certainly do now. In any case, this is not what you, as an adult choose to believe in. If walking the dog, or attending Star trek conventions, gives your life purpose and meaning, it's certainly none of my business.

This was only about your promising to provide evidence. Clearly, you have only provided half-truths, suppositions, denials, and everything but evidence. I still don't understand how anyone could believe that another human being can be a messenger for a God. Let alone serve and obey him.

 

[ChristineM]

No, Muhammad does not meet the same criteria as Baha'u'llah. First, we do not have a clearly recorded history of his life and mission as we do for Baha'u'llah... Second, we do not have original scriptures that He wrote in His own pen. as we have for Baha'u'llah... Third, we do not have all the prophecies that He fulfilled, as we have for Baha'u'llah... Clearly, there is more verifiable evidence for Muhammad than for Moses or Jesus, but not as much as we have for Baha'u'llah.

I have provided the definitions of proof and evidence in an effort to explain that evidence is not proof, and I have said I cannot prove the existence of God, nobody can. All we have is evidence that "indicates" that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God, and if He was that means there has to be a God... There is no proof that God exists but the evidence for Baha'u'llah is good enough for me to know that God exists. YMMV.

Faith is a necessary adjunct to belief, because nobody can prove that God exists.... but once we know, we know. It is not necessary to have objective proof to have certitude.

As i said, a higher threshold of evidence for other faiths.

Remembering of course he 1400+ years difference between them.

There us actually no verifiable evidence for moses or jesus in tjhev same way we have no verifiable evidence of god and hence the claim that Baha'u'llah was a messenger of god.

Nope you have provided opinion based of faith. You have not provided any definitions that i have read.

So if you can't prove the existence of god how can you honestly say there is evidence that Baha'u'llah was gods messenger. Do you not see the contradiction? The most you can say is that you believe.

Yes it is necessary to have proof to have certitude otherwise what you have is faith. Ahahh!

There is a considerable amount of verifiable proof to indicate god or gods don't exist and until that proof is disproven that's enough for me. But that's another story.

 

[Riders]

Why are some Christians so insulting and mean? ANything you can say about Atheists is also true about other folks from other religions. SO why ask the question? There are good and bad folks who are atheist and Christian.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

No, one of your sources was not objective at all. It was obvious attempt to discredit the Baha’i Faith. It was calumny. That site even had a thumbs down so right away we know it cannot be objective!

The problem is that there really is not a lot of objective information about the Baha’i Faith because it is so new and nobody has taken it seriously enough to write about it. In the future, there will be more objective scholarly works written about it and its history as we now have about Christianity and the other major religions

How do you know that was presented as historical and factual evidence is accurate? There is no way for you to know that since you know hardly anything about the Baha’i Faith. Have you independently verified it or compared it to other sources of information, or did you just assume it is accurate because it “looked accurate.” To be fair, you would have to look at other sources of information, even those that are presented by the Baha’i Faith.

Yes you would go to Clan or White Supremacist sites to get information about what they believe and do.Who could know better what they believe and do than those who belong to those groups? What possible reason would they have to misrepresent what they believe and do? What you would get on other sites that disagree with their beliefs and actions are not going to be objective at all, for very obvious reasons; those sources of information would most likely disagree with the philosophies and actions of the clan and white supremacists, so they are going to present a distorted view of what the clan and white supremacists actually believe in and do.

That is exactly what those who disagree with the Baha’i Faith do, and many do it so coyly that the unsuspecting reader/viewer is fooled into thinking that they present “actual facts.” Some might be facts, but their interpretation of those facts and spinoff from them to draw conclusions are where the problem comes in, because it is biased by their hatred towards the Baha’i Faith. You could say the same thing about the “facts” presented by the Baha’is, that they are biased by their love for the Baha’i Faith, but now we need to look at motive, because it is practically the whole ball game. First of all the Baha’is know more about their own religion that outsiders and secondly they have no motive to lie about their own religion.

And that is what we have, scads of evidence that “indicates” that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God. There is much more evidence for Him than for any of the Messengers of the past religions, and it is verifiable evidence. By contrast, for Jesus all we have are stories written by men, many unnamed.

The most obvious reason why God would need a Messenger is that God cannot materialize, come to earth and write 15,000 Tablets, as Baha’u’llah did.

You are right, there is no explicit or implicit direct connection between any human being on the planet and a God, but there is a connection between a Messenger of God and God.A Messenger of God is not just a man. He is a higher order of creation. He is a subtle, mysterious and ethereal Being that has been assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. His body is human but His Soul was not conceived at conception like ours, but was rather pre-existent. In that preexistence His Soul was given the capacity to receive direct revelations from God. Although the Messenger had to translate that Revelation into a form we could understand, His Words are endowed with an invisible spiritual force.

Of course, just because someone believes someone is a Messenger of God does not make it so. Beliefs do not create reality, but neither does evidence. Baha’u’llah was either a Messenger of God or not. The way we determine that is to look at all the evidence that indicates that, but since everyone interprets that evidence differently, not everyone is going to come to the same conclusion.
The scientific method of inquiry cannot be used as a tool for dismissing any religious claims. They are outside the scope of science and the evidence that supports them is a wholly different kind of evidence.

I agree that altruism is a human attribute and the secular organizations are doing the same things that religious organizations do. These secular organizations can promise peace, education, and the desire to bring people together and they can do that to a degree, but they do not have the capacity or a plan that will bring the whole world together. The Baha’i Faith does have such a plan and it is unfolding right now.

Obedience to a divine belief are part of my motivation because I believe God exists and God sent a new Messenger for this age in history. It is as simple as that. You do not believe in God, so obviously that won’t be part of your motivation.

I do not create my own logic, I just use my logic to determine what I will believe. I never said I could prove it to anyone else, in fact I have said many times that I cannot. But I have proven it to myself given the evidence I have.

Do you really expect members of any club to say that the club they joined was the wrong club? It is naïve to think creationists, racist, or religious sites, will give an objective unbiased depiction of their position? Do you expect that these sites will give the pro's and con's about their beliefs? Of course not. It might be counterproductive and not in their best self-interests. Do you think those in positions of authority and power, would be meticulous in protecting their position of power? Why do you think the video you deposited portrayed your faith in such a slick, glossy, stylized, and ecclesiastic manner? I'll stick with my independent sources. Remember, I'm only interested in the facts, not the interpretation of the facts(philosophies and ideologies). If the facts are consistent enough, the number of interpretations will be limited. So, were the facts incorrect or not? Which facts were distorted, misrepresented, or omitted? If so, in what way? I'm not interested in intent, or what you think the intent was. Why would you think that any group trying to bring the whole world together in peace and harmony, would become a target for persecution? Does this plan for world peace and harmony, include world obedience and domination? You do realize if all the governments of the world did what you told them, you would be controlling the world? Any way, this is not about what faith you choose to believe in. I personally would never belong to any group that pledges obedience to another human being, let alone an immaterial one. Of course I don't need to believe in superstitions to be motivated, I am self-motivated. I've always thought that was a good thing.

You are right, there is no explicit or implicit direct connection between any human being on the planet and a God, but there is a connection between a Messenger of God and God.A Messenger of God is not just a man. He is a higher order of creation. He is a subtle, mysterious and ethereal Being that has been assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself. His body is human but His Soul was not conceived at conception like ours, but was rather pre-existent. In that preexistence His Soul was given the capacity to receive direct revelations from God. Although the Messenger had to translate that Revelation into a form we could understand, His Words are endowed with an invisible spiritual force.

Of course, just because someone believes someone is a Messenger of God does not make it so. Beliefs do not create reality, but neither does evidence. Baha’u’llah was either a Messenger of God or not. The way we determine that is to look at all the evidence that indicates that, but since everyone interprets that evidence differently, not everyone is going to come to the same conclusion.
The scientific method of inquiry cannot be used as a tool for dismissing any religious claims. They are outside the scope of science and the evidence that supports them is a wholly different kind of evidence.

Evidence does not create reality, evidence confirms reality. The scientific method of inquiry cannot be used to confirm religious reality, because it doesn't exist. It is a tool used for dismissing scientific claims. Since religious claims have no rational basis in science, they can't be dismissed. Claims of an ethereal being, a higher order of creation, something born of the substance of a God, something that is both material and spiritual, human pre-existence, the soul and the soul of a God, are all mental constructs, based on what we believe is real, not what is real. No examples you gave are falsifiable or verifiable. No rational method of inquiry can reconcile willful ignorance and absolute faith. These can only be rationalised by faith and cognitive dissonance. My reality is based on cause and effect. Nothing escapes this fundamental idea. Where did this messenger come from? This is an unknown cause, and is inconsistent, and impossible in my reality. Your comments about why god would need a messenger is laughable. You mean that a God couldn't materialize if He wanted to? He's done it before. Or is this just more of your suppositions, and self-serving rationalism? Maybe you think that He just had His personal reasons. Do you know what they might be?

Your circular reasoning for belief is almost textbook perfect. You are right, God certainly chose well.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

No, even if we are both looking at the same objective evidence there is absolutely no reason to think that you would see it the same way I see it, because it requires interpretation, and that is subjective. For example, I can read the Writings of Baha’u’llah and immediately believe that had to come from God whereas you can read them and believe they are just an ordinary book. Unless people have brains that are clones of one another there is no way they will all see the same objective evidence in the same way.

I did not say that science and religion are two sides of the same coin, I said they are like two wings of a bird and humanity needs both to function properly, to grow and develop, to prosper and advance.Scientific knowledge is based in verifiable natural events. Religious knowledge is based on knowledge from God that comes through Messengers of God aka Prophets. The objective facts/evidence of science provide us with a very high degree of certainty. The objective facts/evidence of the Messengers provide us with a lesser degree of certaintybut if we have good evidence that evidence provides certainty for some people, depending upon how they view the evidence. However, a certain degree of faith is necessary since the existence of God cannot be proven, nor can we prove that the Messenger received a message from God, since only He knew that for certain.

Science has a basis for truth, but religion also has a basis for truth, they are simply different kinds of truth. Humanity needs both science and religion to function, which is why I said they are like two wings of a bird. Moreover, humanity survived long before we had modern science, but humanity never survived without religion, since Messengers have been sent by God since the dawn of man. Morals do not just drop out of mid-air. People learn moral behavior. Religions do have practical value.

“All religions teach that we must do good, that we must be generous, sincere, truthful, law-abiding, and faithful; all this is reasonable, and logically the only way in which humanity can progress.

All religious laws conform to reason, and are suited to the people for whom they are framed, and for the age in which they are to be obeyed..........

Now, all questions of morality contained in the spiritual, immutable law of every religion are logically right. If religion were contrary to logical reason then it would cease to be a religion and be merely a tradition. Religion and science are the two wings upon which man’s intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism...”
Paris Talks, pp. 141-143

I know the Will of God because what Baha’u’llah wrote is identical to the Will of God, so I know what the requirements are of a true seeker: Tablet of the True Seeker

That God guides or chooses only humble and open-minded peopleconforms to reason because God cannot guide arrogant and closed-minded people since God would have to override their free will in order to make them believe. If a person does not have any humility they will not even be willing to consider the “possibility” that Baha’u’llah could be a Messenger of God, in which case they will not even bother to check out His claim in any serious fashion. How then could they ever be a believer?

Even if con men con humble and open-minded people that does not prove God is a con man.

I know that God wants belief to be a choice and that a God does not violate anyone’s free will because Baha’u’llah wrote that, in so many words. The only way to know anything about God’s Will is from Messengers of God. I do not need to be God to know God’s Will. I just need to read what was revealed by God to Baha’u’llah, which was also interpreted by His appointed interpreters to whom He gave authority by virtue of His written Covenant.

You can “believe” that God did not guide my decision but you cannot assure me of that unless you know the mind of God.

That God guides or chooses only humble and open-minded peopleconforms to reason because God cannot guide arrogant and closed-minded people since God would have to override their free will in order to make them believe. If a person does not have any humility they will not even be willing to consider the “possibility” that Baha’u’llah could be a Messenger of God, in which case they will not even bother to check out His claim in any serious fashion. How then could they ever be a believer?

Are you really suggesting that God only chooses sheep for his herd of followers? He doesn't want any critical thinking rational minded people, that might ask Him for some objective evidence? Or,should people serve and obey a demigod for the rest of their life, without question? You are correct, only a certain personality type would be targeted for this sort of herd. He obviously knows who to pick. He plants the the seed, and let cognitive dissonance do the rest. Evidence is objective. It is only the interpretation of the evidence that is subjective. It is through the scientific method, logic, and review, that makes the interpretation of the evidence less subjective. Religious interpretations are based on zero evidence, therefore zero degree of certainty.

No one should serve or obey another human being as a God or Demigod, no matter how you try to rationalize it. There are those who thought Michael Jackson and Stevie Nicks(my goddess) were Demigods. But no matter how much I wanted it to be so, my prefrontal lobe told me sorry IT AIN'T. They are just beautiful human beings, just like me.

Let's not get into religious morality. No one should ever follow the morality of the Bible. Our morality evolves from our culture, our society, and our genes. Certainly not from any man-made, man-written, man-edited, and man-compiled Bible. Humanity does not need any religion. If it did, there would only be ONE religion, and only ONE true God. But there isn't. It is religion that needs Humanity. Whether I believe or not, has absolute no effect on any event in my life. None. However, science has. So are they both necessary in any real practical sense? Science is, and Belief isn't.

I know the Will of God because what Baha’u’llah wrote is identical to the Will of God, so I know what the requirements are of a true seeker

I'm afraid you know nothing, you simply believe you do. No rational mind can possible know what the Will of God is. Or, what is in the mind of a God. I have always said, "If you tell people what they want to hear, they will listen, but if you tell them how to think, they will follow". For me, any young minds submitting to this type of servitude is tragic and sad. But that's just me. My kids are smarter than that. There are just so many things you can devote your life to(sports, academia, arts and crafts, science, research, etc.) that are real, why devote your life to something that is not real?

 

[Trailblazer]

As i said, a higher threshold of evidence for other faiths.

Remembering of course he 1400+ years difference between them.

There us actually no verifiable evidence for moses or jesus in tjhev same way we have no verifiable evidence of god and hence the claim that Baha'u'llah was a messenger of god.

Nope you have provided opinion based of faith. You have not provided any definitions that i have read.

So if you can't prove the existence of god how can you honestly say there is evidence that Baha'u'llah was gods messenger. Do you not see the contradiction? The most you can say is that you believe.

There is no proof (verifiable evidence) that God exists, all we have is the evidence that indicates that God exists. That evidence that indicates that God exists is the Messengers of God, of which Baha’u’llah is one.

It is impossible to find evidence or proof that God exists FIRST, before believing that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God, since the only evidence that God exists is the Messengers of God.

Yes it is necessary to have proof to have certitude otherwise what you have is faith. Ahahh!

No, it is not necessary for me to have objective proof that God exists in order to have certitude that God exists. Baha’u’llah was a perfect mirror image of God, so that is proof to me that God exists.

There is a considerable amount of verifiable proof to indicate god or gods don't exist and until that proof is disproven that's enough for me. But that's another story.

What is that verifiable proof that indicates god or gods don't exist?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why are some Christians so insulting and mean? ANything you can say about Atheists is also true about other folks from other religions. SO why ask the question? There are good and bad folks who are atheist and Christian.

You are correct. Anyone can be insulting or mean. It has nothing to do with what they believe or disbelieve. It is because of their personality.

I was not really asking a question as much as I was venting about one atheist who was insulting and mean to me. I am pretty much over it now though. I tried to be nice to him and he just ignored me so there is nothing more I can do... time to move on.

 

[Trailblazer]

Please stop misrepresenting everything that I say. It is becoming annoying. I was never comparing your Baha'i beliefs or ideology with the Clan. I was suggesting and implying that any objective and impartial source would be more accurate without any self serving dogma to amplify its importance or self-interests. That is why my sources are not racial or religious. The rest of your paragraph was based on this straw man. And since people change their religion or ideology all the time, the 84% statistic you mentioned is irrelevant.

I know you were not comparing Baha'i beliefs or ideology with the Clan, but you were saying that we should obtain information about them in the same ways, look at an objective and impartial sources. The problem is that there are no objective and impartial sources that present information about the Baha’i Faith since people either like it or they hate it, and the people who hate it have their own reasons for hating it.

The best source of information about the Baha’i Faith is the Baha’i Faith. It is pure paranoia to think that the Baha’i Faith is presenting inaccurate information about the religion in order to amplify its importance or self-interests. The Baha’i Faith IS what it IS. That is represented by the “authoritative writings” of the Baha’i Faith; the writings of Baha’u’llah, Abdu’l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi and the Universal House of Justice. Baha’is and others can have “different opinions” about those Writings but they cannot change them.

There is every reason to think those that hate the Baha’i Faith are presenting inaccurate information in order to denigrate and discredit it. This has happened throughout history whenever a religion was new.

“From the beginning of the world until the present time each ‘Manifestation’ 1 sent from God has been opposed by an embodiment of the ‘Powers of Darkness’.

This dark power has always endeavoured to extinguish the light. Tyranny has ever sought to overcome justice. Ignorance has persistently tried to trample knowledge underfoot. This has, from the earliest ages, been the method of the material world.

In the time of Moses, Pharaoh set himself to prevent the Mosaic Light being spread abroad.

In the day of Christ, Annas and Caiaphas inflamed the Jewish people against Him and the learned doctors of Israel joined together to resist His Power. All sorts of calumnies were circulated against Him. The Scribes and Pharisees conspired to make the people believe Him to be a liar, an apostate, and a blasphemer. They spread these slanders throughout the whole Eastern world against Christ, and caused Him to be condemned to a shameful death!

In the case of Muhammad also, the learned doctors of His day determined to extinguish the light of His influence. They tried by the power of the sword to prevent the spread of His teaching.

In spite of all their efforts the Sun of Truth shone forth from the horizon. In every case the army of light vanquished the powers of darkness on the battlefield 103 of the world, and the radiance of the Divine Teaching illumined the earth. Those who accepted the Teaching and worked for the Cause of God became luminous stars in the sky of humanity.

Now, in our own day, history repeats itself.

Those who would have men believe that religion is their own private property once more bring their efforts to bear against the Sun of Truth: they resist the Command of God; they invent calumnies, not having arguments against it, neither proofs. They attack with masked faces, not daring to come forth into the light of day.

Our methods are different, we do not attack, neither calumniate; we do not wish to dispute with them; we bring forth proofs and arguments; we invite them to confute our statements. They cannot answer us, but instead, they write all they can think of against the Divine Messenger, Bahá’u’lláh.”
Paris Talks, pp. 102-103

What you are presenting is misinformation and fallacy-riddled logic. If what you believe is only relevant to you, then keep it to yourself. But if you are trying to make a case to justify your belief, then you have failed. Your beliefs are subjective, proof is objective. If all you can do is assert that aspects of your belief is your objective evidence, then you have failed to convince any objective person. If you don't care about your reasoning, then you must feed off of negative reasoning to justify your belief.

I am not trying to make a case to justify my belief. I do not need to justify my belief to anyone else except myself. If people want to justify it they will have to justify it to themselves, after looking at the evidence that supports it.

Both OBE's and NDE's require a living host to experience them, and tell you about them later. It also requires a functioning sensory mechanism (brain and sense organs). As in normal life, the conscious(less than 10% of the brain's activities) perception of reality is only as good as the information the brain received from the sense organs. Faulty sense organs or a faulty brain', will directly lead to a faulty perception. But this perception is still based in the physical reality. Again because we cannot disprove what does not exist in the physical reality, doesn't mean that a non-physical reality exist by default. The job of proving a negative falls on the person making the negative claim. Therefore since there is clear objective evidence that consciousness is a product of a functioning brain, what is your proof that a zero dimensional consciousness can exist outside of the brain? Other than simply asserting that I can't prove it doesn't? The dream state is a manifestation of the third layer of the mind (unconsciousness). It still requires a functional brain, since the dead don't dream. Or are you going to suggest that I also prove that as well?

OBEs and NDEs do not prove there is a soul, they simply indicate that there is consciousness outside the body. NDEs do not prove there is an afterlife since the people were not fully dead long enough to have experienced what is in the spiritual world.

I am not trying to prove anything so I do not have a burden of proof. Moreover, the soul and the spiritual world are both mysteries. The Writings of Baha’u’llah explain that even the most learned of men cannot ever unravel the mystery of the soul. Baha’u’llah explains the soul’s function and purpose. Baha’u’llah promises us that there will be an afterlife but does not describe the spiritual world.

There is no objective evidence of the soul or spiritual world that I can present because one cannot find of objective evidence of non-material phenomena. That does not mean that they do not exist.

Likewise, science has its limitations. Science can only examine material phenomena such as the brain. Science cannot examine the human soul or the spiritual world.

My statement was, "To expect extraordinary evidence to support extraordinary claims is certainly not illogical. In fact, it is logically expected. You have a right to believe anything you want, but you don't have a right to create your own logic". Do you think that you should NOT expect to produce extraordinary evidence to support your extraordinary claims? Do you think that claiming a human to be a messenger for a God, the existence of a soul, or the existence of a supernatural sky daddy, are just simply everyday normal claims based in reality? If you think they are, then they don't require any evidence and I have indeed created a straw man.

My extraordinary evidence is the life and Writings of Baha’u’llah. Those are my evidence for the God, the soul and the spiritual world. They will be evidence for anyone else who considers them evidence, and they will not be evidence for those who do not consider them evidence.

As you have stated many times before, there is not only zero evidence for the existence of an IMMATERIAL God, but that it would be illogical to expect there would be. Your entire argument is to propose a non-argument as evidence. If there is no evidence of a material God, then God has no material relevance in a material reality. All cults and religions have one thing in common. They all rely on claims that are unfalsifiable and unscientific. Therefore, you can only teach what you think is true, not what you know is true.

I never said there is zero evidence for the existence of God, I said that Baha’u’llah is the evidence. What I said is that there is no objective proof that God exists since God is immaterial. There is no way to know if or how God affects the material reality because the Essence of God is a mystery.

You are correct that all religions rely on claims that are unfalsifiable and unscientific, for the simple reason that religion is not science. You can no more make religion scientific than you can make science supernatural. Religion and science have entirely different purviews.

This is a "switch and bait". If God is non-material then which is it, that you KNOW that God exists, or that you KNOW that there is no material evidence to support His existence. Creative, but mutually exclusive. That leaves us with only one option left. That is, a material God with material evidence. If this option were true since the beginning of time, you are correct, a God would have been discovered a long time ago. But of course this is not what the argument is about (hence switch an bait). Since you can't provide objective evidence, or accept your burden of proof, simply find a way to dismiss of misdirect. More intellectual dishonesty.

No, it is honesty. I was just presenting the two different possibilities for a God, material and immaterial, and the ramifications of each. There is no switch or bait. There is no burden of proof. I am not trying to prove anything because I cannot prove what cannot be proven, God.

I KNOW God exists, and I KNOW that there is no material evidence to support His existence because God is not a material Being. The way I know is because of what Baha’u’llah wrote about God, which “I consider”proof that God exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

What I call accurate is when all unbiased, non-religious, ex-members, and religious and cult historian sites, begin sounding the same. It is the consensus of commonality that indicate certainty for me. When you simply deny without explanation, you are actually confirming my certainty.

There is not consensus because our desires and preferences for religion and everything else come from a combination of factors such as childhood upbringing, heredity, education, adult experiences, and present life circumstances. Some people like me just see the truth right away but other people study the Baha’i Faith for years before they believe it. Moreover, if one has a huge confirmation bias from a past bad experience with religion in childhood, they are not going to give any religion a fair shot.

How can you expect everyone to have the same opinion? That is virtually impossible. If they all sounded the same then everyone would either be Baha’is or non-Baha’is, but clearly that is not what we see. Does everyone on this forum believe the same thing? What people believe is not any indication of what is actually true. A religion is either true or not. A God either exists or not. Baha’u’llah warned against listening to what people think as any indication of truth.

“The essence of these words is this: they that tread the path of faith, they that thirst for the wine of certitude, must cleanse themselves of all that is earthly—their ears from idle talk, their minds from vain imaginings, their hearts from worldly affections, their eyes from that which perisheth. They should put their trust in God, and, holding fast unto Him, follow in His way. Then will they be made worthy of the effulgent glories of the sun of divine knowledge and understanding, and become the recipients of a grace that is infinite and unseen, inasmuch as man can never hope to attain unto the knowledge of the All-Glorious, can never quaff from the stream of divine knowledge and wisdom, can never enter the abode of immortality, nor partake of the cup of divine nearness and favour, unless and until he ceases to regard the words and deeds of mortal men as a standard for the true understanding and recognition of God and His Prophets.”
The Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 3-4

Baha’u’llah also wrote that whenever a new religion appears, opinions will sorely differ, and explained why this has to happen before the religion eventually comes to be widely accepted.

“What “oppression” is greater than that which hath been recounted? What “oppression” is more grievous than that a soul seeking the truth, and wishing to attain unto the knowledge of God, should know not where to go for it and from whom to seek it? For opinions have sorely differed, and the ways unto the attainment of God have multiplied. This “oppression” is the essential feature of every Revelation. Unless it cometh to pass, the Sun of Truth will not be made manifest. For the break of the morn of divine guidance must needs follow the darkness of the night of error. For this reason, in all chronicles and traditions reference hath been made unto these things, namely that iniquity shall cover the surface of the earth and darkness shall envelop mankind. As the traditions referred to are well known, and as the purpose of this servant is to be brief, He will refrain from quoting the text of these traditions.”
The Kitab-i-Iqan, pp. 31-32

Similarly, Jesus said that narrow is the gate that leads to truth and few will find it. The reasons are very logical.

Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.”

As this relates to religion, the religion at the narrow gate is the religion God wants us to find and follow, but it is not that easy for most people to find because most people are steeped in religious tradition and attached to what they already believe. If they do not have a religion, most people are suspicious of the “new religion.” Only a few people recognize God’s new religion in the beginning.

Jesus told us to enter through the narrow gate, the gate that leads to eternal life, and He said few people would find that gate... It is narrow, so it is difficult to get through... It is difficult to get through because one has to be willing to give up all their preconceived ideas and think for themselves. Most people do not normally embark upon such a journey. They go through the wide gate, the easy one to get through – their own religious tradition. They follow that broad road that is easy to travel, the road that leads to destruction.

Most people enter through the wide gate and follow the road that leads to destruction... It is easier to walk through the wide gate and walk the easy road that is behind it because people do not have to think for themselves, they just follow the crowd. It is also easier for people to have many others who agree with them rather than just a few. Baha’is do not care how many people agree with them because they know they have the most current Truth from God.

For example, do some members of the Persian Baha'is refer to other Baha'is as KHAR (donkey, in Persian)? If the consistency of evidence demonstrates that there were 6-7 Black American Presidents before Obama, then I will also consider the evidence for accuracy, not the assertion. I will always follow the evidence. Do you feel that the Baha'i faith is "Iran's gift to the world"? Are the majority of the Baha'i membership still Persians? Do you feel that your role in the Baha'i world is obedience, and to teach others the skills to also be obedient? Or can they question and make their own decisions? I knew nothing about the faith before, but I certainly do now. In any case, this is not what you, as an adult choose to believe in. If walking the dog, or attending Star trek conventions, gives your life purpose and meaning, it's certainly none of my business.

People believe in the Baha’i Faith for different reasons because all people are different. I believed it originally because of the teachings but now the bigger reason I believe it is because I believe that Baha’u’llah was a Representative of God.

I do not know how Persian Baha’is refer to each other. No, I do not feel that the Baha'i faith is Iran's gift to the world; it is Baha’u’llah’s gift to the world. No, the majority of the Baha’i membership are not Persians. Baha’is live in about 250 different countries all over the world and the Baha’i Faith is almost as widespread as Christianity. Obedience to the Laws of Baha’u’llah are only one aspect of the Faith. Following the spiritual and social teachings is the most important aspect of being a Baha’i, Imo. Of course we can question and make our own decisions, but we try to be obedient to the Baha’i Laws.

This was only about your promising to provide evidence. Clearly, you have only provided half-truths, suppositions, denials, and everything but evidence. I still don't understand how anyone could believe that another human being can be a messenger for a God. Let alone serve and obey him.

All I said is that there is evidence and I listed the different categories of evidence, but everyone has to investigate that evidence for themselves if they want to understand it. That is the first principle of the Baha’i Faith:

“The first principle Baha’u’llah urged was the independent investigation of truth. “Each individual,” He said, “is following the faith of his ancestors who themselves are lost in the maze of tradition. Reality is steeped in dogmas and doctrines. If each investigate for himself, he will find that Reality is one; does not admit of multiplicity; is not divisible. All will find the same foundation and all will be at peace.” – Abdu’l-Baha, Star of the West, Volume 3, p. 5.

“What does it mean to investigate reality? It means that man must forget all hearsay and examine truth himself, for he does not know whether statements he hears are in accordance with reality or not. Wherever he finds truth or reality, he must hold to it, forsaking, discarding all else; for outside of reality there is naught but superstition and imagination.” – Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 62.

 

[Trailblazer]

Do you really expect members of any club to say that the club they joined was the wrong club? It is naïve to think creationists, racist, or religious sites, will give an objective unbiased depiction of their position? Do you expect that these sites will give the pro's and con's about their beliefs? Of course not. It might be counterproductive and not in their best self-interests. Do you think those in positions of authority and power, would be meticulous in protecting their position of power? Why do you think the video you deposited portrayed your faith in such a slick, glossy, stylized, and ecclesiastic manner? I'll stick with my independent sources. Remember, I'm only interested in the facts, not the interpretation of the facts(philosophies and ideologies). If the facts are consistent enough, the number of interpretations will be limited. So, were the facts incorrect or not? Which facts were distorted, misrepresented, or omitted? If so, in what way? I'm not interested in intent, or what you think the intent was. Why would you think that any group trying to bring the whole world together in peace and harmony, would become a target for persecution? Does this plan for world peace and harmony, include world obedience and domination? You do realize if all the governments of the world did what you told them, you would be controlling the world? Any way, this is not about what faith you choose to believe in. I personally would never belong to any group that pledges obedience to another human being, let alone an immaterial one. Of course I don't need to believe in superstitions to be motivated, I am self-motivated. I've always thought that was a good thing.

The point I was making in my last post is that it does not MATTER what other people think of the Baha’i Faith. If we want to know what it teaches we need to go and read what it teaches, not listen to other people’s OPINIONS about it. As I said in the last post, that is called “Independent investigation of truth.” The EVIDENCE for the Baha’i Faith is not peoples’ personal opinions about it. Whether the religion is true or false all hinges upon whether Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God or not. The evidence thathelps us determine that is as follows: His character; what He did during His mission on earth; the history of His religion; the scriptures that He wrote; 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, what they have done and are doing now. All this constitutes verifiable evidence.

You said: “I'm only interested in the facts, not the interpretation of the facts(philosophies and ideologies).” In that case you need to go to the original sources that represent the Baha’i Faith, not peoples’ opinions about the Baha’i Faith. All you will get from sources about the Baha’i Faith are personal opinions. Accurate information about the Baha’i Faith can be found in a book such as Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era and in this book the author addresses the difficulties in investigation:

“There are, of course, difficulties in the way of the student who seeks to get at the truth about this Cause. Like all great moral and spiritual reformations, the Bahá’í Faith has been grossly misrepresented. About the terrible persecutions and sufferings of Bahá’u’lláh and His followers, both friends and enemies are in entire agreement. About the value of the Movement, however, and the character of its Founders, the statements of the believers and the accounts of the deniers are utterly at variance. It is just as in the time of Christ. Concerning the crucifixion of Jesus and the persecution and martyrdom of His followers both Christian and Jewish historians are in agreement, but whereas the believers say that Christ fulfilled and developed the teachings of Moses and the prophets, the deniers declare that He broke the laws and ordinances and was worthy of death.”
Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 9

You said: “If the facts are consistent enough, the number of interpretations will be limited.” I do not know why you think that. There will be as many different interpretations as there are people.

You said: “Why would you think that any group trying to bring the whole world together in peace and harmony, would become a target for persecution.” There is a very simple answer to that. It is because the bulk of the world population is comprised of the older religions like Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism, and most of these people are unwilling to relinquish their traditional beliefs for the good of the whole world. Those that do care about peace and harmony more than their own beliefs become Baha’is. There is evidence for what I just said. Clearly, everyone thinks their religion is the best or the last, so obviously they are going to oppose the Baha’i Faith, since we claim to be the “current” religion from God, the most recent. However, we do not claim to be the last religion as we believe more religions will be established in the future, throughout eternity.

You said: “Does this plan for world peace and harmony, include world obedience and domination? You do realize if all the governments of the world did what you told them, you would be controlling the world?”No, there is no plan for domination of anyone. Joining the Baha’i Faith is strictly voluntary and the Baha’i Faith has no plans to take over any governments since our members are disallowed from being involved in politics except to vote. This short excerpt explains it in a nutshell:

“The Faith which this order serves, safeguards and promotes is … essentially supernatural, supranational, entirely non-political, non-partisan, and diametrically opposed to any policy or school of thought that seeks to exalt any particular race, class or nation. It is free from any form of ecclesiasticism, has neither priesthood nor rituals, and is supported exclusively by voluntary contributions made by its avowed adherents. Though loyal to their respective governments, though imbued with the love of their own country, and anxious to promote at all times, its best interests, the followers of the Bahá’í Faith, nevertheless, viewing mankind as one entity, and profoundly attached to its vital interests, will not hesitate to subordinate every particular interest, be it personal, regional or national, to the over-riding interests of the generality of mankind, knowing full well that in a world of interdependent peoples and nations the advantage of the part is best to be reached by the advantage of the whole, and that no lasting result can be achieved by any of the component parts if the general interests of the entity itself are neglected….”
The Promised Day Is Come, vi - vii

Evidence does not create reality, evidence confirms reality. The scientific method of inquiry cannot be used to confirm religious reality, because it doesn't exist. It is a tool used for dismissing scientific claims. Since religious claims have no rational basis in science, they can't be dismissed. Claims of an ethereal being, a higher order of creation, something born of the substance of a God, something that is both material and spiritual, human pre-existence, the soul and the soul of a God, are all mental constructs, based on what we believe is real, not what is real. No examples you gave are falsifiable or verifiable. No rational method of inquiry can reconcile willful ignorance and absolute faith. These can only be rationalised by faith and cognitive dissonance. My reality is based on cause and effect. Nothing escapes this fundamental idea. Where did this messenger come from? This is an unknown cause, and is inconsistent, and impossible in my reality. Your comments about why god would need a messenger is laughable. You mean that a God couldn't materialize if He wanted to? He's done it before. Or is this just more of your suppositions, and self-serving rationalism? Maybe you think that He just had His personal reasons. Do you know what they might be?

You said: “The scientific method of inquiry cannot be used to confirm religious reality, because it doesn't exist. It is a tool used for dismissing scientific claims. Since religious claims have no rational basis in science, they can't be dismissed.Claims of an ethereal being, a higher order of creation, something born of the substance of a God, something that is both material and spiritual, human pre-existence, the soul and the soul of a God, are all mental constructs, based on what we believe is real, not what is real.”

There are some serious problems with what you said. You cannot prove that religious reality does not exist so you cannot make such a CLAIM. You also cannot prove that an ethereal being, a higher order of creation, something born of the substance of a God, something that is both material and spiritual, human pre-existence, the soul and the soul of a God, are all mental constructs,based on what we believe is real, not what is real, so you cannot make such a CLAIM. In other words, all these things could be real, even though they cannot be proven by science; because they are outside of the purview of science, lack or scientific evidence does not prove anything at all.

You said: “Where did this messenger come from? This is an unknown cause, and is inconsistent, and impossible in my reality.” Your reality is not my reality, nor is it the reality of 93% of the world population; not that numbers matter because REALITY is what it is, and has nothing to do with what we BELIEVE it is. But most people in the world believe in God so that means most people accept unknowns. It is only a handful of nonbelievers who have to know everything objectively before they will believe it. FYI, the Messenger came from the heaven of the will of God. His soul had always existed in the spiritual world before his body was born into this material world. His soul united with his body when he was born.

You said: “Your comments about why god would need a messenger is laughable. You mean that a God couldn't materialize if He wanted to? He's done it before.” My comments as to why we need a Messenger are logical, as logical as the day is long. There is no other reasonable method whereby a God could convey what Bahaullah wrote in over 15,000 Tablets whereby everyone in the world would have access to this information. When did God materialize before? I know of no such event in history.

 

[Trailblazer]

Are you really suggesting that God only chooses sheep for his herd of followers? He doesn't want any critical thinking rational minded people, that might ask Him for some objective evidence? Or,should people serve and obey a demigod for the rest of their life, without question? You are correct, only a certain personality type would be targeted for this sort of herd. He obviously knows who to pick. He plants the the seed, and let cognitive dissonance do the rest. Evidence is objective. It is only the interpretation of the evidence that is subjective. It is through the scientific method, logic, and review, that makes the interpretation of the evidence less subjective. Religious interpretations are based on zero evidence, therefore zero degree of certainty.

I am not suggesting that God chooses anyone, but rather that God guides people He already KNOWS will believe in Him; since God is omniscient God already knows who those people are. For decades after I became a Baha’i I shut the door in God’s face so I was not guided. God does not violate free will.

The people God guides are the critical thinking rational minded people that are logical enough to realize that they have to look at the evidence God provides, because they cannot MAKE an omnipotent God DO anything other than what He does, since no human is omnipotent.

What God does is send Messengers, so people unwilling to consider them as evidence will not be guided; they do not need a Guide, since they have not even taken the trip. This all makes sense if you think about it. The people God guides are not the herd. The herd follows others rather than thinking for themselves. The herd follows whatever conclusions they have already come to based upon their prejudices and confirmation bias. They are unwilling to be guided by God because they have already made up their minds. God guides free thinkers, people who are open-minded. These are in the minority, but narrow is the way that leads to life and few will find it.

No one should serve or obey another human being as a God or Demigod, no matter how you try to rationalize it. There are those who thought Michael Jackson and Stevie Nicks(my goddess) were Demigods. But no matter how much I wanted it to be so, my prefrontal lobe told me sorry IT AIN'T. They are just beautiful human beings, just like me.

Believe as you wish. Messengers of God are not human beings like you and me. They are a different order of creation, above any ordinary human. But we do not worship them, we worship only God.

Let's not get into religious morality. No one should ever follow the morality of the Bible. Our morality evolves from our culture, our society, and our genes. Certainly not from any man-made, man-written, man-edited, and man-compiled Bible.

Our morality evolved from religion because that is what culture and society are based upon; and that includes the Bible. No human is born with morals. Babies are the most selfish creatures on earth. They think only of themselves, then gradually as they get older they learn moral behavior. If Messengers of God had never come to earth to establish religions there would be no moral behavior. People would just live like wild animals, survival of the fittest, everyone living for themselves. But clearly that is not what we see in the world, we see altruistic behavior. That comes from religion, not from science.

Humanity does not need any religion. If it did, there would only be ONE religion, and only ONE true God. But there isn't. It is religion that needs Humanity. Whether I believe or not, has absolute no effect on any event in my life. None. However, science has. So are they both necessary in any real practical sense? Science is, and Belief isn't.

There is only ONE religion and ONE true God. People just have not realized that yet, because they don’t know what Baha’u’llah wrote:

“The world’s equilibrium hath been upset through the vibrating influence of this most great, this new World Order. Mankind’s ordered life hath been revolutionized through the agency of this unique, this wondrous System—the like of which mortal eyes have never witnessed.

Immerse yourselves in the ocean of My words, that ye may unravel its secrets, and discover all the pearls of wisdom that lie hid in its depths. Take heed that ye do not vacillate in your determination to embrace the truth of this Cause—a Cause through which the potentialities of the might of God have been revealed, and His sovereignty established. With faces beaming with joy, hasten ye unto Him. This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 136

Whether you believe or not, religion has an effect on your life. You do not need to believe it, absence of belief is just like a plant growing in the shade. It cannot see the sun but the sun is still above the clouds.

I'm afraid you know nothing, you simply believe you do. No rational mind can possible know what the Will of God is. Or, what is in the mind of a God. I have always said, "If you tell people what they want to hear, they will listen, but if you tell them how to think, they will follow". For me, any young minds submitting to this type of servitude is tragic and sad. But that's just me. My kids are smarter than that. There are just so many things you can devote your life to(sports, academia, arts and crafts, science, research, etc.) that are real, why devote your life to something that is not real?

I know what the Will of God is for this age in history because Baha’u’llah revealed it in His Writings. I do not know what is in the Mind of God, nobody knows that.

What is tragic and sad for me is to see people devoting themselves to what is transitory, the material world and all it has to offer. The material world is real but the spiritual world is also real. The difference is that the material world is fleeting and the spiritual world is eternal. I spent most of my life devoting myself to the material world and whatever I got from that will soon pass away and be no more. That is why I prefer to devote myself to what is eternal. It makes more logical sense.

 

[oldbadger]

The best source of information about the Baha’i Faith is the Baha’i Faith.

No.
Not if you want the truth.

That's rather like believing that the best source of information about any country is to be found at its Ministry of Propaganda!

 

[Trailblazer]

No.
Not if you want the truth.

That's rather like believing that the best source of information about any country is to be found at its Ministry of Propaganda!

I guess you do not understand what I meant by that. I meant that the Writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi represent the Baha'i Faith beliefs, just as the New Testament represents Christian beliefs.

You can leave the Baha'i Administration out of it. That is not information about the Baha'i Faith. The Baha'i Faith existed before there was any administration, just as Christianity existed before there as a Church.

The Truth about the Baha'i Faith is contained in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.

 

[oldbadger]

I guess you do not understand what I meant by that. I meant that the Writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi represent the Baha'i Faith beliefs, just as the New Testament represents Christian beliefs.

OK. What you believe is up to you.
I would only challenge some claims by Bahai about it's history and it's intentions for the future.

You can leave the Baha'i Administration out of it. That is not information about the Baha'i Faith. The Baha'i Faith existed before there was any administration, just as Christianity existed before there as a Church.

I would most certainly include the Bahai administration deeply in it, because Bahauallah layed out his administrative order in writing as part of his plan for the future.

The Truth about the Baha'i Faith is contained in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi.

So these three names have equal status?
So the writings of these three persons do not vary from one another?

I would only regard the writings of Bahauallah as the absolute authority about Bahai, his son living as his example and his great grandson laying out his administration.....

 

[ChristineM]

There is no proof (verifiable evidence) that God exists, all we have is the evidence that indicates that God exists. That evidence that indicates that God exists is the Messengers of God, of which Baha’u’llah is one.

It is impossible to find evidence or proof that God exists FIRST, before believing that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God, since the only evidence that God exists is the Messengers of God.

No, it is not necessary for me to have objective proof that God exists in order to have certitude that God exists. Baha’u’llah was a perfect mirror image of God, so that is proof to me that God exists.

What is that verifiable proof that indicates god or gods don't exist?

That is not verifiable evidence, that is opinion, you are welcome to your opinion but please don't bastardise the definition of words to massage your belief.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

I can see that Baha'i followers are experts at manipulating terminology to mean whatever they want it to mean(just like creationists, and flat-earthers). They seem to be experts in claiming, that if no proof is possible, then no proof is necessary. But, if proof is necessary, we will determine what is necessary. Even the burden of proof becomes irrelevant, since the claims are only meant to convince themselves and not others outside of the group. Therefore, all claims are subjectively true. All logic becomes in-house logic based on in-house presuppositions. In this house, making and justifying extraordinary claims is as easy as ordering a cuppa. Any rational argument is intellectually dismissed, sermonized over, treated with disconnected and meaningless word salad, and basically told that you are just not interested. In this house there is no greater purpose then to serve and obey a self-proclaimed demigod, from a succession of other human beings also claiming to be demigods. There is a hive mentality on what to believe, and cognitive dissonance does the rest. Let me stress that you may be completely right. I certainly don't know everything for certain. This is only my opinion, or my belief if you will.

I'm afraid going through 3 canned disjointed, proselytizing rants, is not my idea of a rational discourse. So I'm afraid that I'm going to have to pass. You stated that you could produce evidence to support your claim of a Messenger from God, God, or anything about the supernatural. In the end, it was only, "there is no proof, and it is illogical to expect any". Then, "My proof is not to prove to others, it is to prove to myself". You like all other cultist, all hide behind the fact that your claims are unverifiable and unfalsifiable. It is the evidence you present that reflect this.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is not verifiable evidence, that is opinion, you are welcome to your opinion but please don't bastardise the definition of words to massage your belief.

Unless you have found verifiable evidence other than Messengers of God that God exists, it is not just an opinion that no such evidence exists. It is a fact. It is like I know for a fact that there is no car in my driveway because there is no car in my driveway.

I am not saying that it is a fact that Messengers of God are verifiable evidence that God exists. It is my belief/opinion that Messengers of God are evidence of God’s existence. It is not a fact because I cannot prove it.

I only speak for myself and what is evidence and proof to me. I do not expect it to be evidence or proof to anyone else.

Please do not impugn motives that do not exist. I am not trying to “massage” my belief. I just share my belief. People should only believe what they choose to believe and what makes sense to them.

 

[Trailblazer]

OK. What you believe is up to you.
I would only challenge some claims by Bahai about it's history and it's intentions for the future.

Fair enough. Actually, I am not proficient in Baha’i history of the specific intentions for the future, but I live in the present, not in the past or the future. I believe that Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be and all the rest of what I believe flows from there. If Baha’u’llah was a Manifestation of God, then whatever will happen in the future as presented by Him was ordained by God. Some of the historical accounts might vary and some people associated with the Baha’i Faith might make some mistakes, but whatever God has ordained cannot be thwarted. That is how I reason it out.

“God’s purpose is none other than to usher in, in ways He alone can bring about, and the full significance of which He alone can fathom, the Great, the Golden Age of a long-divided, a long-afflicted humanity. Its present state, indeed even its immediate future, is dark, distressingly dark. Its distant future, however, is radiant, gloriously radiant—so radiant that no eye can visualize it......”
The Promised Day is Come, p. 116

I would most certainly include the Bahai administration deeply in it, because Bahauallah layed out his administrative order in writing as part of his plan for the future.

Fair enough...

So these three names have equal status?
So the writings of these three persons do not vary from one another?

According to many Baha’is I know, the Writings of these three have equal status, as they are all part of what we call the “authoritative writings” of the Baha’i Faith. I do not think that they vary even if they might seem to vary. They are just different ways of explaining the same beliefs and teachings.

Keep in mind that Abdu’l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi knew each other in person and they also knew Persian and Arabic. Many of the Tablets of Baha’u’llah have not been translated into English yet so they might have known some things we have not yet read in English.

I would only regard the writings of Baha’u’llah as the absolute authority about Baha’i, his son living as his example and his great grandson laying out his administration.....

I tend to think the same way you do, that only the Writings of Baha’u’llah constitute absolute authority, but not all Baha’is would agree with me. We have had these discussions often on Planet Baha’i.

If I cannot find something in the Writings of Baha’u’llah, I look for what Abdu’l-Baha or Shoghi Effendi wrote, but I do not consider it infallible because they were not infallible just because they were appointed as the interpreters by virtue of the Covenant of Baha’u’llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

I can see that Baha'i followers are experts at manipulating terminology to mean whatever they want it to mean (just like creationists, and flat-earthers). They seem to be experts in claiming, that if no proof is possible, then no proof is necessary. But, if proof is necessary, we will determine what is necessary. Even the burden of proof becomes irrelevant, since the claims are only meant to convince themselves and not others outside of the group.

All Baha’is are separate individuals. I do not speak for “Baha’is.” I only speak for myself. I use my logic and reason. No proof of God’s existence is possible unless God provides proof, since God is omnipotent and we are not. I have the evidence that is necessary for me to believe/know that God exists so I do not need any objective proof.

What is necessary for you and other nonbelievers is not necessary to everyone else under the sun. We are all unique individuals. You have to determine what is necessary only for yourself.

The burden of proof is absolutely irrelevant because Baha’is do not have the burden to prove that God exists to anyone else except themselves. Baha’is are not trying to convince anyone of what we believe, not if we are doing what Baha’u’llah enjoined us to do. Baha’u’llah wrote that the faith of no man can be conditioned by anyone else except Himself, which means that everyone has to independently investigate the claim of Baha’u’llah and come to their own conclusions as to whether it is true or not.

In this house there is no greater purpose then to serve and obey a self-proclaimed demigod, from a succession of other human beings also claiming to be demigods. There is a hive mentality on what to believe, and cognitive dissonance does the rest. Let me stress that you may be completely right. I certainly don't know everything for certain. This is only my opinion, or my belief if you will.

You are welcome to your opinion or beliefs but keep in mind that beliefs do not create reality. Baha’u’llah was either a Messenger of God or not. If He was there are huge implications for individuals and the human race. If not, then something else is the truth. There are many other possibilities; we all have free will so everyone is free to choose what to believe.

You stated that you could produce evidence to support your claim of a Messenger from God, God, or anything about the supernatural. In the end, it was only, "there is no proof, and it is illogical to expect any". Then, "My proof is not to prove to others, it is to prove to myself". You like all other cultist, all hide behind the fact that your claims are unverifiable and unfalsifiable. It is the evidence you present that reflect this.

I never made a claim. I only said I have a belief I know is true. I know it is true because of how I evaluated the evidence. I never said it was a fact because facts can be proven.

I never said that I could produce evidence to support a claim of a Messenger from God, God, or anything about the supernatural because I never made a claim. I do not claim it, I believe it. I said there is evidence that anyone can look at, not that I would present that evidence. I said that everyone has to look at that evidence for themselves, IF they are interested in determining whether Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God or not. Nobody is responsible to do anyone else’s homework. The days when clerics spoon fed God’s Truth to the masses have ended. This is a new day wherein people can do their own homework.

Do you understand that Christianity is an enemy of the Baha’i Faith? So, you post a video that was made by Christians and that is supposed to be accurate information about the Baha’i Faith? Or is your intent to discredit the Baha’i Faith?

Why would anyone expect a video made by Christians to represent accurate information about the Baha’i Faith? No logical person would expect this. Would anyone go Caiaphas to get accurate information about Jesus? Enemies of the Baha’i Faith cannot possibly be objective, but they are just hoping to dupe unsuspecting viewers who don’t bother to look at what the Baha’i Faith is really all about, people who have a bone to pick with the Baha’i Faith or people who have confirmation bias and seek only to believe what they want to confirm.

Please note that the Baha’is do not have any websites that attack Christianity. We do not need them because we know that God’s Messenger will prevail because He always has.

“No one casts stones at a tree without fruit. No one tries to extinguish a lamp without light!

Regard the former times. Had the calumnies of Pharaoh any effect? He affirmed that Moses was a murderer, that he had slain a man and deserved to be executed! He also declared that Moses and Aaron were fomenters of discord, that they tried to destroy the religion of Egypt and therefore must be put to death. These words of Pharaoh were vainly spoken. The light of Moses shone. The radiance of the Law of God has encircled the world!

When the Pharisees said of Christ that He had broken the Sabbath Day, that He had defied the Law of Moses, that He had threatened to destroy the Temple and the Holy City of Jerusalem, and that He deserved to be crucified—We know that all these slanderous attacks had no result in hindering the spread of the Gospel!

The Sun of Christ shone brilliantly in the sky, and the breath of the Holy Spirit wafted over the whole earth!

And I say unto you that no calumny is able to prevail against the Light of God; it can only result in causing it to be more universally recognized. If a cause were of no significance, who would take the trouble to work against it!

But always the greater the cause the more do enemies arise in larger and larger numbers to attempt its overthrow! The brighter the light the darker the shadow! Our part it is to act in accordance with the teaching of Bahá’u’lláh in humility and firm steadfastness.”
Paris Talks, pp. 105-106

 

[Truly Enlightened]

The objective facts and data I have are regarding the deity’s Messenger. I can present a logical argument as to why that is the only way we can ever know anything about the deity. I have scads of Word documents on this topic because I have written so many posts to nonbelievers on other forums. I would not even know where to start.

God does not prove He exists because He wants us to prove that to ourselves by using our own innate powers of reasoning.

God also does not prove He exists to everyone because God wants to separate out the wheat from the chaff, meaning He wants to separate those who are willing to make a sincere effort from those who do not really give a darn. The omniscient God already knows which are which, but he wants them to become who He knows they will be.

Nobody can prove that God does not exist. They can say that the evidence indicates that God does not exist, but they cannot prove it. If they could prove it, we’d all be atheists.

So we cannot have proof of God before we believe in the Messengers...
Once we are sure the Messenger was sent by God that is proof to us that God exists, even though it is not proof in the sense of being an established fact, since there is no way to establish the existence of God as a fact, since God is not an objective reality.

For me to say "I believe" or "I know" God exists is not a claim because it is an "I statement," not an assertion that what "I believe" is the truth.

I have sufficient evidence to prove TO MYSELF that God exists, as I just said in the post above, to Unveiled Artist. I just cannot prove it to anyone else, because everyone has to prove it to themselves, based upon the evidence that is available.

The burden of proof is absolutely irrelevant because Baha’is do not have the burden to prove that God exists to anyone else except themselves

I'm not going to provide any more of your quotes, because you will only dismiss, deny, or change their meaning and purpose, to give them a false perception of credibility. We are not talking about ordinary evidence that can or cannot be misinterpreted about ordinary claims. We are talking about extraordinary evidence, that must support extraordinary claims. Or do you think that claims of Messengers from God, World Unity, and the existence of a supernatural God, are just ordinary claims? You can misinterpret me saying that I have a pet p***y living with me, but not if I say I have have an invisible polka dot flying dragon living with me. You certainly have the burden of proof, because it is YOU making the claim, not me. Or, are you now saying that God does not exist? I know that we are all different, but a red light signal is interpreted the same in China, as it is in America. Any objective evidence should mean the same for me as it does for you. That is the meaning of objective evidence. I also get the impression when you are not sermonizing, religious quote-mining, or proselytizing, you simply rephrase everything we ask.

No proof of God’s existence is possible unless God provides proof, since God is omnipotent and we are not. I have the evidence that is necessary for me to believe/know that God exists so I do not need any objective proof.

This is typical of your flawed logic. How do you get from A to B, when A does not exist? Also I don't care if the video was made by the Son's of Katie Elder, or God himself. Are the facts presented in the video incorrect or not? The fact that you are whinging about peripherals(motive), or facts that are not in question, only supports my suspicions. You have done everything you can to discredit the video, except the obvious. Proving that the facts are incorrect. Is it true that only one Book that has been translated, and two Books haven't? That would mean that 2/3rds of your religions is unknown to you. You are simply being told what is written. Maybe being told how to think, and what to believe, is all the evidence you need for knowledge.

Belief is the absence of knowledge, and knowledge is the absence of belief. The more knowledge you have the less need you have for belief. I know my car is parked in the garage. If I didn't know that, I might only believe that my car is parked in the garage. I may believe that I sound like the great crooners, but I know that the sacred Ibis sound better. The minute I know something is true/certain, it should also be objectively true/certain. I'm not here to judge you, or your decisions. You give your opinions and I give you mine. But trying to support truth claims with subjective evidence, testimonials, and fallacy-riddled logic, is really a waste of both of our times.