The issue to me isn't necessarily theological, it's more philosophical. There are those in certain religions who just can't seem to accept the fact that there are those who would disagree with them, on a philosophically fundamental level. Eastern religion works by a completely different paradigm than Abrahamic religions. While Bahai's might think they're theology is moving in a more progressive direction, and attempts to unite all the world's religions, we have to understand that, while some might see this as noble, there is an inherent danger. To me, the Bahai point of view isn't really any different than fundamentalist Islam or Christianity. And I'll take it a step further: Bahai theology is even more disingenuous, as it says that it unites all the world's religions, but is firmly rooted in an Abrahamic worldview, completely denying anything Eastern. Bahai's may very much mean well, but their underlying philosophical worldview is inherently flawed and illogical.
And this leads to my OP: there is a great danger in attempting to interpret one's religions philosophy and scriptures from a completely different worldview. You simply cannot take an Eastern religion, and try to understand it from a western perspective. The philosophical worldview between the Dharmic religions and Abrahamic religions are so fundamentally different, that any attempt at convergence or syncretism is simply unfathomable.
