Why doesn’t God communicate directly to everyone?

[Altfish]

God is intelligent enough to know that using Messengers is the best way to communicate messages to humanity.
God’s intelligence comes with being All-Knowing and All-Wise.

She is!!

Well, you'd have thought after however many years she's been trying to get her message across she'd have realised that it has been one big failure.

 

[Trailblazer]

She is!!

Well, you'd have thought after however many years she's been trying to get her message across she'd have realised that it has been one big failure.

No, God is not a failure just because there are a few atheists...

According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (200 million convinced atheists). Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia

That means that 93% of the world population believes in God.

If God had never used Messengers, hardly anyone would believe in God because the main reason people believe in God is because of one of those Messengers. Very few people in the world believe in God for some other reason. 84 percent of the world population has a faith and those faiths all have some kind of Founder, what I refer to as a Messenger. So obviously, using Messengers is a successful method of communication.

There will always be people who do not believe in God because man has free will so man can choose to believe in God or not. This is exactly the way God wants it, otherwise God would not have created man with free will.

Worldwide, atheism was growing at a rate of 6.54% from 1910-2010 but dropped to a growth rate of 0.05% from 2000-2010. Agnosticism was growing at a rate of 5.45% from 1910-2010 but dropped to a growth rate of 0.32% from 2000-2010. That demonstrates that both atheism and agnosticism are on the decline but also that there are many more agnostics than atheists.

Statistics from: Growth of religion - Wikipedia

 

[oldbadger]

The part you conveniently omitted is that this Baha’i World Order will never replace any incumbent governments.

So what are all the criminal laws, judicial punishments, world police etc etc force for?
Double Think!

It means an assembly of none people who serve on a democratically elected institution of the Baha’i Faith; nothing more, nothing less.

So why did Bahauallah write laws like your treasure trove laws, which would be enforced by your houses of justice?
He wrote legislation that will NEVER EVER be used?
Double Think!

That is paranoia, plain and simple. There is absolutely no reason to think that there is any deception within the Baha’i Faith, .............

Deception exists about the Bab's ideas, writings and following.
Deception exists around the thousands of killings in Iran.
Deception exists about nearly every aspect of Bahai!
Double Think!

Again, what you are omitting is that even if the Houses of Justice had their own legislation, laws, punishments, civil law and everything else, this would only apply to Baha’is, not to anyone else.

It cannot apply to Bahais if Bahais must obey their own country's laws!
Double Think!

That is pure paranoia unless of course you have some verifiable evidence to back up your claims. Obviously that evidence would have to come from an objective source, not from a defamer of the Baha’i Faith.

And so all the witnesses, testimonies and evidence that you don't like.... you wish to ban .............
Total denial, and .........
Double Think!

 

[Altfish]

No, God is not a failure just because there are a few atheists...

According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (200 million convinced atheists). Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia

That means that 93% of the world population believes in God.

If God had never used Messengers, hardly anyone would believe in God because the main reason people believe in God is because of one of those Messengers. Very few people in the world believe in God for some other reason. 84 percent of the world population has a faith and those faiths all have some kind of Founder, what I refer to as a Messenger. So obviously, using Messengers is a successful method of communication.

There will always be people who do not believe in God because man has free will so man can choose to believe in God or not. This is exactly the way God wants it, otherwise God would not have created man with free will.

Worldwide, atheism was growing at a rate of 6.54% from 1910-2010 but dropped to a growth rate of 0.05% from 2000-2010. Agnosticism was growing at a rate of 5.45% from 1910-2010 but dropped to a growth rate of 0.32% from 2000-2010. That demonstrates that both atheism and agnosticism are on the decline but also that there are many more agnostics than atheists.

Statistics from: Growth of religion - Wikipedia

In the western world non-belief is the fastest growing 'religion'
In my country, the UK, non-belief is the biggest 'belief' overtaking Christianity in the latest YouGov poll.
Near me churches are closing or merging in droves. The church I attended as a kid was demolished about 6-months ago and houses are now appearing. The place where that congregation moved about 10-years ago has downsized and the original building has gone to be replaced by flats.
The RC church closed 15-years ago.
The only ones growing are the 'new' religions and muslims and they are from a low base and mainly due to immigrants bringing their religion with them.

Indoctrination works up to a point but when people become educated religious number decline.

 

[Trailblazer]

So what are all the criminal laws, judicial punishments, world police etc etc force for?
Double Think!


So why did Bahauallah write laws like your treasure trove laws, which would be enforced by your houses of justice?
He wrote legislation that will NEVER EVER be used?
Double Think!


Deception exists about the Bab's ideas, writings and following.
Deception exists around the thousands of killings in Iran.
Deception exists about nearly every aspect of Bahai!
Double Think!



It cannot apply to Bahais if Bahais must obey their own country's laws!
Double Think!


And so all the witnesses, testimonies and evidence that you don't like.... you wish to ban .............
Total denial, and .........
Double Think!

The only deception is on the part of those who attack the Cause of God...
But these calumnies will not succeed, they never have.

“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

 

[Trailblazer]

In the western world non-belief is the fastest growing 'religion'
In my country, the UK, non-belief is the biggest 'belief' overtaking Christianity in the latest YouGov poll.
Near me churches are closing or merging in droves. The church I attended as a kid was demolished about 6-months ago and houses are now appearing. The place where that congregation moved about 10-years ago has downsized and the original building has gone to be replaced by flats.
The RC church closed 15-years ago.
The only ones growing are the 'new' religions and muslims and they are from a low base and mainly due to immigrants bringing their religion with them.

Clearly Christianity is in its death throes, which is why there are so many agnostics and atheists in the Western world. Most of them were formerly Christians.
Islam and the Baha'i Faith are the fastest growing religions in the world.

Indoctrination works up to a point but when people become educated religious number decline.

Yes, when people become more educated they are no longer willing to accept the superstitious doctrines of Christianity.
Religion might be on the decline but belief in God is not on the decline, not that it really matters what people believe or disbelieve, because God either exists or not.

 

[Altfish]

Clearly Christianity is in its death throes, which is why there are so many agnostics and atheists in the Western world. Most of them were formerly Christians.
Islam and the Baha'i Faith are the fastest growing religions in the world.

Yes, when people become more educated they are no longer willing to accept the superstitious doctrines of Christianity.
Religion might be on the decline but belief in God is not on the decline, not that it really matters what people believe or disbelieve, because God either exists or not.

Baha'i is growing but from a low base. It has less than 10m adherents last I heard.
Muslim is growing through a combination of birth rates and fear.

 

[PureX]

No, because I wrote that in response to the claim that because 93% of people claim to believe in god that it somehow gives credence to the notion that god must be real.

It does give credence to that assertion. It does not PROVE that assertion, however. You are assuming that only the evidence that you deem convincing is valid evidence. But evidence does not hove to be convincing to be evidence. And it certainly doesn't have to be convincing, to you. Because evidence does not have to reach the level of proof to be evidence. Nor does it have to meet your criteria for being convincing.

I see no value or necessity to believe in any fantastical claim without verifiable evidence.

That, however, has no bearing on whether or not the claim is true. Truth is not determined by what you choose to believe is valuable or necessary.

If I have verifiable evidence, I have no need for faith. If a belief requires faith in order to accept it, then I don't think it's a belief worth holding.

Again, this has nothing to do with determining the truth. It's simply your own bias regarding what you choose to believe about the truth, and what you choose not to believe.

Don't you think it's important to recognize the difference between bias, and truth? Because from what I am reading here, you are not.

 

[PureX]

Why should everyone get the same message that Baha’u’llah got directly from God? Do you realize that He wrote over 15,000 Tablets? Do you really think that “everyone” could receive and record all those Tablets?

You're only giving evidence of the colossal inefficiency and high probability of error and abuse being generated by not simply placing the message directly into everyone's mind.

Why would it be necessary for everyone to get the same messages He got directly from God, when God can reveal those messages to one Messenger who can receive and record the messages and make them available to everyone in the world?

Why would any message be necessary at all? Why wouldn't God simply place the information It wanted us to know directly into our minds, and avoid all the inefficiency and likelihood of error and abuse?

It is a moot point what people want because no ordinary human is capable of receiving direct communication from God. Only a Messenger of God has those capabilities.

Why do you assume that we are "incapable"? Didn't you just claim that SOME humans are receiving messages from God?

What I refer to as Messengers of God are also called Manifestations of God.

Everything that exists is a "manifestation of God".

A Manifestation of God is human, but more than a human.

Now you are resorting to reasoning based on "magic", and once we go down that road, logical discourse has no value.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I did answer the question.

9-10ths_Penguin said: What evidence?

Trailblazer said: His character, His life, His teachings, His predictions that came to pass, stuff like that...
Not only do we know exactly what Baha’u’llah wrote in His Own Pen, we also know what Baha’u’llah said to other people and how He treated other people, because it is recorded in their memoirs which are published in books. These people knew Baha’u’llah personally and they attested to His character and His truthfulness.

What is it about these things that you think is evidence?

I mean, I "write in my own pen" too; do you think that this is evidence that *I'm* a messenger of God? If not, how is Baha'u'llah doing this evidence in his case?

It is “part” of the evidence but that alone would not be adequate evidence because some people who are not Messengers of God have a good character.

The evidence that Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be is His Person (His character);

What about "his person" or "his character?" Every person has a character.

the history of His life; what He did during His mission on earth;

Every person has a life history and does things on Earth; what about Baha'u'llah and what he did is evidence?

the scriptures that He wrote;

What about them?

what others have written about Him;

Like that video you posted a while back with the Englishman who met him, said that he was remarkable, but in the end didn't follow him and become a Baha'i?

the Bible prophecies that He fulfilled and the prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled;

Which specific prophecies are those?

the predictions He made that have come to pass;

What did he predict?

the religion that was established as the result of His Revelation, what His followers all over the world have done and are doing now.

What about these is evidence that he's a messenger of God? I mean, I'm sure we could point to religions founded by people who you don't consider messengers of God.

All this constitutes evidence that is verifiable.

Yes - you assure me that the evidence is wonderful and you've described general categories of evidence, but you haven't actually pointed me to any evidence at all.

Do you understand what I'm asking for?

 

[ChristineM]

There is a 100% lack of proof because God wants it that way.

That is your belief for which you have no evidence

 

[BilliardsBall]

But it is self-evident that an angel gave Joseph Smith those golden plates.

Near universally? You really ought to read what I say and reply to what I say.

Again, why didn't you address the shortcomings in your view before debating my beliefs?

 

[Hawkins]

On another forum I said: “One reason God does not communicate to everyone is because everyone does not deserve to know that God exists.” I said that people have to be willing to sincerely search for God using their own innate powers of reasoning in order to be worthy of knowing God exists, rather than just sitting back and doing nothing, waiting for God to communicate to them.

Then this one atheist said that was a lame-*** excuse and he says it is just common sense that God should communicate directly to everyone.

This is what he has been saying to me for over three years. Everyone (all of the 7.4 billion people in the world) should get direct communication from God. God should not use Messengers because not everyone believes in them, especially in the beginning, when they first show up on earth.

What do you think; does everyone on earth deserve direct communication from God or should people be required to search for God themselves?

All humans on earth are bound to a covenant. The covenant which saves says that humans need faith to be saved. So if everyone can communicate with God directly, it simply means no one can be saved by the covenant.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Near universally? You really ought to read what I say and reply to what I say.

Again, that is an argument from popularity.

Again, why didn't you address the shortcomings in your view before debating my beliefs?

Which views are you attributing to me?

 

[oldbadger]

The only deception is on the part of those who attack the Cause of God...
But these calumnies will not succeed, they never have.

We are not attacking any cause of God.

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

A tree without fruit is exactly the right one to throw stones at.
We tried to extinguish the Nazis, so you think that they had a good light?
Anybody can turn this rhetorical drivvle around....

But you cannot give a straight answer to my points, just throw insults and personal accusations.

Most reasonable folks here just acknowledge the faiths of others, but when every thread posted is a side-creeping and insidious 'sell' of 'our prophet is best', 'our way is best' and 'ours is the true way' and suchlike, then you can expect to get it shaken and stirred for a test......... and you then you call out 'liars!' It's all very shallow..... really.

 

[Koldo]

Clearly Christianity is in its death throes, which is why there are so many agnostics and atheists in the Western world. Most of them were formerly Christians.
Islam and the Baha'i Faith are the fastest growing religions in the world.

Yes, when people become more educated they are no longer willing to accept the superstitious doctrines of Christianity.
Religion might be on the decline but belief in God is not on the decline, not that it really matters what people believe or disbelieve, because God either exists or not.

Baha'i is growing but from a low base. It has less than 10m adherents last I heard.
Muslim is growing through a combination of birth rates and fear.

Kim Kardashian has 60 million followers on Twitter.
Let that sink in.

 

[Altfish]

Kim Kardashian has 60 million followers on Twitter.
Let that sink in.

Yes, that's what I meant. Number of followers doesn't mean good or true.

 

[Sleeppy]

On another forum I said: “One reason God does not communicate to everyone is because everyone does not deserve to know that God exists.” I said that people have to be willing to sincerely search for God using their own innate powers of reasoning in order to be worthy of knowing God exists, rather than just sitting back and doing nothing, waiting for God to communicate to them.

Then this one atheist said that was a lame-*** excuse and he says it is just common sense that God should communicate directly to everyone.

This is what he has been saying to me for over three years. Everyone (all of the 7.4 billion people in the world) should get direct communication from God. God should not use Messengers because not everyone believes in them, especially in the beginning, when they first show up on earth.

What do you think; does everyone on earth deserve direct communication from God or should people be required to search for God themselves?

The heavens, the Earth, and everything in them are direct communications.

 

[QuestioningMind]

It does give credence to that assertion. It does not PROVE that assertion, however. You are assuming that only the evidence that you deem convincing is valid evidence. But evidence does not hove to be convincing to be evidence. And it certainly doesn't have to be convincing, to you. Because evidence does not have to reach the level of proof to be evidence. Nor does it have to meet your criteria for being convincing.
That, however, has no bearing on whether or not the claim is true. Truth is not determined by what you choose to believe is valuable or necessary.
Again, this has nothing to do with determining the truth. It's simply your own bias regarding what you choose to believe about the truth, and what you choose not to believe.

Don't you think it's important to recognize the difference between bias, and truth? Because from what I am reading here, you are not.

It does give credence to that assertion. It does not PROVE that assertion, however. You are assuming that only the evidence that you deem convincing is valid evidence. But evidence does not hove to be convincing to be evidence. And it certainly doesn't have to be convincing, to you. Because evidence does not have to reach the level of proof to be evidence. Nor does it have to meet your criteria for being convincing.

Perhaps you consider evidence that isn't convincing to be valid, but I do not. And yes, it does have to meet my criteria for being convincing for me to conclude that it's true. Some people will believe virtually anything based on very unconvincing evidence. I consider such people to be gullible.

That, however, has no bearing on whether or not the claim is true. Truth is not determined by what you choose to believe is valuable or necessary.

You are correct. It is POSSIBLE for something to be true, even though there is no valid evidence to support it. However, that doesn't mean that I accept that something IS true, simply because it's POSSIBLE that it COULD be true. I don't declare that something IS true, unless I have verifiable evidence to support the notion. Sadly there are plenty of people who do declare that claims are true, even though they possess zero verifiable evidence to support the claims.

Again, this has nothing to do with determining the truth. It's simply your own bias regarding what you choose to believe about the truth, and what you choose not to believe.

Speak for yourself. Weather I believe in a claim DOES have to do with whether or not I can determine via verifiable evidence if it's likely to be true. You are more than welcome to believe any ridiculous claim that you want without verifiable evidence. I choose not to believe any fantastical claim without verifiable evidence. So yes, I guess I DO have a bias for verifiable evidence. It's a bias that I wish far more people had.

 

[CG Didymus]

I guess you are referring to the Burning Bush.
We do not know that the story was even true, or if it was just an allegory.
I believe that God communicated to Moses through the Holy Spirit, but that was only proof to Moses. It is also proof to those who believe in Moses.

Likewise, Baha'u'llah is proof to me that God exists but it is not proof to everyone...
When I said that there is no proof that God exists, I meant there is no objective proof that is demonstrable to all people.

Luke 3:22 says that the Holy Spirit descended like a dove and a voice came out of heaven and said "Thou art My beloved Son..."

Yeah, what about that voice? What is the Baha'i explanation of God supposedly speaking?