LordOfGoblins

Well really.
If you take feelings out of it and intution it is really not that much different from a crime scene IMO. Noone was there to witness what happened (to know what the writer really meant), so some things are often left to interpretation.

A convincing proof is one that is backed up by evidence. But even then the evidence must in itself be convincing and solid.
Now lets say if you are at a crime scene. Do you consider a footprint with a shoe marking that is not identifyable, an evidence that the person who had the shoe on was wearing an addidas shoe?
No. That is a week evidence. The evidence needs to be more solid or it is just interpretation. Your interpretation of that footprint is that it is an addidas shoe.
MY INTERPRETATION IS THAT IT IS NIKE SHOE.
Now if you can proove your interpretation is true then thats another thing...
Its sad to see people who think posting lots of stories or verses thinks they automatically have a proof, when the story is interpretative or worse, not even related to what they are trying to proove.
Perhaps this works on sheep or week minded people.
On me though and anyone who has learnt to think independantly rather than being told how to think, such approaches are useless.
This seems to be what has caused people to fail to recognise new religions..

What makes a religious proof convincing for you?
Please share any ideas if you want..

abahai

I think if you are seeking an absolute proof the closest you will get is a logical proof - see my latest tweet for a link to such a proof... however, these are all a little abstract for my liking, but might be interesting if your mind is locked onto the principle of some kind of absolute proof.
https://twitter.com/abahai1

I think Adib Taherzadeh explains the concept of Faith well in Growing in the Baha'i Faith. We have a soul and you can choose what to give your soul to. If you give it to the power of the revelation of Bahá'u'lláh then the fruit of that union, your soul and that revelation will be the Spirit of Faith.

The spirit of Faith is what will manifest certitude in your life. So the way I understand it Faith is the key, and that by definition implies you will never find an absolute proof. I often think of it like this. If there was an absolute reducible proof, understandble by everyone as hard evidence.. then what good what that do us in this world? Only the insane would then not embrace living in His ways. Which would make our existence pointless in this realm as far as I understand it.

I think the battle one has as an early believer to develop that certitude is a key part of ones spiritual development. I would love to have that gem of certitude because then of course, nothing would be too much trouble for us surely. How could we be pulled by the chances and trials of the world if we had absolute certainty? Yet if it was simply a matter of learning some fact, then how pointless would that be.

I have had moments where I have really 'felt' some kind of connection. Little things like today I was listening to some audio about the soul and a mirror, and I glance up at that exact moment to a huge towering mirrored building. The timing, and the effect it has on me felt very different to ordinary existance, and it is these little things that are building my faith in these early stages.

I don't think I would like for there to be an ultimate proof because then what would the point be in my existence? I would simply be here to live a planned life to the best of my ability. I think the pleasure is in the journey, at least for me at the moment, getting to be familiar with God (i'm so far away from that currently) but that is the real journey.

I am sure there are some Bahá'is who have developed absolute certainty and that is awesome and I want to get there! But they have done it in the abscence of absolute proof and I think that is what makes it a worthwhile journey.

Iconodule

For me at first it was merely the love of Christ on the cross, but I realised while that was part of it, the ultimate foundation was teh ressurection and since then I have only but been convinced by the reality of the ressurection, and by extension the reality of the life giving sacraments.

LordOfGoblins

great post!
That is why i treat it like a crime scene (well i mean i just thought of teh analogy in order to be fairminded and not predjudiced).
We can never ultimately proove who done it if noone was there. But we can establish strong evidence which forms a strong argument.
of course the faith aspect I didnt touch on which is critical as well...

LordOfGoblins

i was talking more in a debate scenario to get your argument across...
You see I, unlike others, dont like the idea of going around in infinate loops until its a 'who has the last word must be right' scenario..

Iconodule

Yes in debate I find that the most convincing proof for Christianity. theres alot for me to learn but I find it very effective. But in terms of the generic nature of proving God, I find morality to be the greatest tool. Can morality exist apart from God? It seems impossible to me. That is for any real, objective binding morality that has consequences.