Announcement
Collapse
General Theistics 101 Guidelines
This area is open for nontheists and theists to interact on issues of theism and faith in a civilized manner. We ask that nontheist participation respect the theistic views of others and not seek to undermine theism in general, or advocate for nontheism. Such posts are more suited for and allowable in Apologetics 301 with very little restriction.
The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.
Forum Rules: Here
The moderators of this area are given great discretion to determine if a particular thread or comment would more appropriately belong in another forum area.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The Baha'i Source some call God(s) and why I believe in God.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostGod is the being than whom nothing is greater. Now, you prove the possibility that God does not exist as defined.
Comment
-
Moderator ' s Notice: This thread is a better fit in Comparative Religions 101 since it's a discussion of Baha'i in comparison to other belief systems.
:Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette
Comment
-
1. The First Assumption is not to be believed because by posting this assumption (the words of Buddha) a person would have to have read it. This is the vey thing we are told not base our belief on. Also, define "good" for that is what we are told to base our belief on.
2. The Second Assumption puts for the idea that truth is no absolute which begs the question if that assumption is an absolute truth to be embraced.
3. The Sixth Assumption presents a false dichotomy. Since God can not be fully known then all of what is written about Him is from a human point of view. Why couldn't there be SOME things about Him written from His point of view that He allows us to know?Last edited by foudroyant; 03-12-2014, 02:53 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by foudroyant View Post1. The First Assumption is not to be believed because by posting this assumption (the words of Buddha) a person would have to have read it. This is the vey thing we are told not base our belief on. Also, define "good" for that is what we are told to base our belief on.
I believe 'Good' is best defined as a healthy relationship with the rest of humanity and the diverse world around us, and healthy and compassionate morals and ethics that promotes healthy spiritual and physical relationships. This probably requires some more thought and dialogue to understand fully.
2. The Second Assumption puts for the idea that truth is no[t] absolute which begs the question if that assumption is an absolute truth to be embraced.
3. The Sixth Assumption presents a false dichotomy. Since God can not be fully known then all of what is written about Him is from a human point of view. Why couldn't there be SOME things about Him written from His point of view that He allows us to know?
There are many things that could be 'known' in a relative sense, without fully be known from the absolute sense. Spiritual values. morals and ethics, compassion, and a healthy good positive relationship with other cultures and religions in an obvious diverse human world.
The healthy positive view of the evolving scientific knowledge of our physical existence based on Methodological Naturalism also demonstrates the unlikely view that human knowledge is realistically consisting of absolutes.Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-12-2014, 06:45 AM.
Comment
-
Assumption 1
a. You have a bias against the perception of the world existing in black and white. How do you know for certain that my search for knowledge could not have lead me to this conclusion?
b. Your understanding of "good" is very subjective. Adolf Hitler could subscribe to it and still be "ok".
Assumption 2
a. To assert that not one human can know even one absolute truth because of competing claims for that truth would require you to know what the absolute truth is...the very thing you say one can not know.
Assumption 6
a. To assert that humanity can not attain any absolute knowledge of God is false. I say, "God exists". I have therefore asserted something that both He and I know is true. Yes, He knows this more deeply than I do but nonetheless you are asserting that it is impossible for me to absolutely know that. How are you absolutely certain that I don't know that?Last edited by foudroyant; 03-12-2014, 09:19 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by foudroyant View PostAssumption 1
a. You have a bias against the perception of the world existing in black and white.
How do you know for certain that my search for knowledge could not have lead me to this conclusion?
By 'certainty' do you mean(1) certainty in the absolute sense, or (2) the most logical and reasonable view based on the evidence? I vote for (2).
b. Your understanding of "good" is very subjective. Adolf Hitler could subscribe to it and still be "ok".
Your joking right? This is ridiculous.
I believe 'Good' is best defined as a healthy relationship with the rest of humanity and the diverse world around us, and healthy and compassionate morals and ethics that promotes healthy spiritual and physical relationships.
There is no way that Adolph Hitler could fits the above. Please explain?? Adolph Hitler persecuted, ethnically cleansed minorities, waged war for domination of by a purely Aryan world view.
Assumption 2
a. To assert that not one human can know even one absolute truth because of competing claims for that truth would require you to know what the absolute truth is...the very thing you say one can not know.
Assumption 6
a. To assert that humanity can not attain any absolute knowledge of God is false. I say, "God exists". I have therefore asserted something that both He and I know is true. Yes, He knows this more deeply than I do but nonetheless you are asserting that it is impossible for me to absolutely know that. How are you absolutely certain that I don't know that?Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-12-2014, 06:00 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostShuny, you make statements like you expect us to accept as true. E.g., Adolf Hitler made war. You ask questions like you expect us to accept as meaningful and not idle.
Your statement about Adolf Hitler is incomplete and out of context. Do you consider my statement about Hitler false?
No I do not ask question and expect anything. Those that respond do so of their own will, those who do not respond likewise. It would help if you cite me completely, and make you posts and statement coherent and meaningful, if you chose to post.Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-12-2014, 05:59 PM.
Comment
-
According to YOU Hitler couldn't subscribe to what you had previously written. He believed he was doing the world a favor by getting rid of those who thought were not worthy to live. In fact, he considered them non-persons (Jews and others).
You are the one who made the assertion how God can not be known in any absolute sense. I claim that I absolutely know that God exists. The historical science of the authenticity of the New Testament affirms its veracity.
Comment
-
Originally posted by foudroyant View PostAccording to YOU Hitler couldn't subscribe to what you had previously written. He believed he was doing the world a favor by getting rid of those who thought were not worthy to live. In fact, he considered them non-persons (Jews and others).
You are the one who made the assertion how God can not be known in any absolute sense.
I claim that I absolutely know that God exists.
The historical science of the authenticity of the New Testament affirms its veracity.Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-12-2014, 08:13 PM.
Comment
-
This is what you wrote in Post #6:
I believe 'Good' is best defined as a healthy relationship with the rest of humanity and the diverse world around us, and healthy and compassionate morals and ethics that promotes healthy spiritual and physical relationships.
Hitler could subscribe to that because in HIS mind he believed he was doing "good". He believed he was ridding the world of undesirables and the detestables.
What we know is based on experience. I studied the evidence the historicity of the New Testament and so now I absolutely know that God exists. How can others know God differently when they at the same time believe He does exist?
I'll start with this:
The New Testament
More manuscripts, more accurately copied manuscripts and earlier manuscripts to their original writing than from any other document from the ancient world.
And over and over again these documents teach that the Lord Jesus rose bodily from the dead and taught that He is God.Last edited by foudroyant; 03-12-2014, 08:30 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by foudroyant View PostThis is what you wrote in Post #6:
I believe 'Good' is best defined as a healthy relationship with the rest of humanity and the diverse world around us, and healthy and compassionate morals and ethics that promotes healthy spiritual and physical relationships.
Hitler could subscribe to that because in HIS mind he believed he was doing "good". He believed he was ridding the world of undesirables and the detestables.
Check you dictionary as to meaning of 'compassionate' and 'healthy.'
What we know is based on experience. I studied the evidence the historicity of the New Testament and so now I absolutely know that God exists. How can others know God differently when they at the same time believe He does exist?
I'll start with this:
The New Testament. More manuscripts, more accurately copied manuscripts and earlier manuscripts to their original writing than from any other document from the ancient world.
Second, no, there are differences in the early manuscripts in the early history, no authors assigned until very late, and nothing known in terms of manuscripts before 70 AD,
And over and over again these documents teach that the Lord Jesus rose bodily from the dead and taught that He is God.
Questions remain unanswered.Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-12-2014, 09:18 PM.
Comment
-
1. Hitler could have a different understanding of what healthy and compassionate mean. Your assumption is subjective so it fails to take into account him and so many others that think like he does. This is the result of refusing to see things in black and white. It leads to a subjective morally that is inefficient in handling cases like this.
2.They don't believe differently if the believe God exists.
3. Your assertion concerning Gilgamesh is false. The New Testament has over 5000 copies.
http://carm.org/manuscript-evidenceLast edited by foudroyant; 03-13-2014, 04:47 AM.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Esther, 11-23-2023, 10:29 AM
|
183 responses
812 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
04-29-2024, 11:24 AM
|
Comment