MichaelAW

There are no 'Proofs' in any teachings/writings in any Faith or Prophet or Dispensation?

You believe things to be true or you don't.

You use whatever maturity, lack of maturity, knowledge, lack of knowledge, bias, lack of bais, experience, lack of experience, peer pressure, personal strength against peer pressure to base all your judgements, beliefs on.

As we all were told as children, "touch that pan on the stove and you'll hurt", many of us touched it anyway. But then in that split second we knew that words can express truth. But through the local thief we learned words can be deceitful.

Most of the time we will never really understand nor firmly know the 'Truth' of most things. All we can do is try hard to grow, learn and be fair, honest and loving to everyone.

Michaelaw

Edit: Post is directed towards those who are conflicted about what others tell them about proofs in the many scriptures/religious writings.

LordOfGoblins

I think PROOF is a sortof poor word. It implies a certain degree of arrogance. PROOVE TO ME THAT YOU EXIST.
PROOVE TO ME. PROOVE. PROOVE.

a better way of looking at it is reasoning and evidence I think. Proofs are too absolute traditionally to be of much use when talking about faith-based topics.

Of course, ultimately God need not proove nothing. He is just there and sends a message whether we choose to investigate or dont...

MichaelAW

I used the term, Proofs, as it is often used in certain circles. My post was not whether one believed in a Creator but more in the written words held by many to be Proofs. The human need to have Proofs in regards to Religion.

Nuck81

Proofs of what?

Or is that your point?

MichaelAW

"There is absolutely no reason to write a proof unless your reader can understand what you're saying. Keep this in mind as you write."

From the Catholic Encyclopedia
Proof is the establishment of a disputed or controverted matter by lawful means or arguments. Proof is the result of evidence; evidence is the medium of proof. There is no proof without evidence, but there may be evidence without proof. Proof is judicial, if offered in court; otherwise it is extra-judicial. Proof is perfect, or complete, when it produces full conviction, and enables the judge without further investigation to pronounce sentence: imperfect, or incomplete, if it begets probability only. Canonists enumerate six kinds of perfect proof: the unshaken deposition of two witnesses, who are above all suspicion; a public document, or other instrument having the force of a public document, as, for instance, a certified copy of a public instrument; conclusive presumption of law; the decisive oath; judicial confession; evidence or notoriety of the fact. Imperfect or semi-proof is derived from the testimony of one witness only, or of several singular witnesses, or of two witnesses not entirely unshaken in their testimony or not beyond all suspicion; writings or instruments of a private character; a document admitted as authentic only on the strength of the handwriting; the necessary oath; presumption which is only probable, not conclusive; public report when legally proved. Two imperfect proofs cannot constitute perfect proof in criminal cases, in which proof must be clearer than the noonday sun; in matrimonial cases, when there is question of the validity of a marriage already contracted; or in civil actions of a grave character. With these exceptions two incomplete proofs tending to establish the same point may constitute full proof or conviction. Judicial proofs must as a rule be full and conclusive. There are, however, some exceptions. Thus the testimony of but one witness will suffice when it is beneficial to another person and hurts no one. Likewise in summary causes of little moment and not prejudicial to any one, half proof is sufficient; also when the judge is commissioned to proceed, having merely examined into the truth of the fact (sola facti veritate

LordOfGoblins

THat is ok.
Consider though. Proof demands that you satisfy some criteria completely or it is not validated. Often a religious proof is outside the realm of common knowledge and thus people are not used to hearing them. So if you try to prove something they will not accept it as a true proof. That is the point I was getting at. However when teaching the faith you try to present evidence you might have a better chance of getting your point across to the person hearing your message if you dont have to satisfy their minds criteria completely.

InvestigateTruth

The only proof after the Manifestation of God, is His Book.

I just quote these beautiful verse from Baha'u'llah, from the Book of Iqan:


"....no manifestation greater than the Prophets of God hath ever been revealed, and no testimony mightier than the testimony of their revealed verses hath ever appeared upon the earth. Nay, this testimony no other testimony can ever excel..."

"nothing greater than these verses hath ever appeared, nor will ever be made manifest in the world!"


"He, the divine King, hath proclaimed the undisputed supremacy of the verses of His Book over all things that testify to His truth."


"Gracious God! how strange the way of this people! They clamour for guidance, although the standards of Him Who guideth all things are already hoisted. They cleave to the obscure intricacies of knowledge, when He, Who is the Object of all knowledge, shineth as the sun. They see the sun with their own eyes, and yet question that brilliant Orb as to the proof of its light. They behold the vernal showers descending upon them, and yet seek an evidence of that bounty."



“To seek evidence, when the Proof hath been established is but an unseemly act, and to be busied with the pursuit of knowledge when the Object of all learning hath been attained is truly blameworthy.”

Prodaytrader

for some people there will never be enough proof with regards to any truth. With respect to Bahai writings the proof of his station is the nature of his writing. No ordinary person can create the volumes of information that he did. No man is capable of producing what he produced and that in iteself was enough for me.

Napkin

This is what attracted me to the faith in the first place. You are encouraged to seek for yourself, read the writings, don't see the truth in it? you are free to go seek it elsewhere.