Can you answer this?

[firedragon]

No, I was not stating my perception of @Link 's position.

This is in response to the "insanity of the west" comment. @Link was advocating the mixing of religion and government and this was an illustration of an extreme version of that. It's purpose was to highlight where such mixing can lead and that it may not be your personal religion that is adopted by the state. There are many real world examples where the minority religions do not fair well.

I remember watching an interview of an author. A fantastic author with some fantastic research. I regret to not have written it down. Prostitutes helped in women's liberation he asserts.

Mixing is good.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I recognized the distinction you made and I am questioning whether such a distinction can be made. Does having a religious belief, de facto, affect everyone else? Do not personal religious beliefs affect how one interacts and makes decisions socially and politically?

I would hope religious belief lead to a person being good toward others. And that a religious person do not trash others who believe differently.
Politically i cant answer for since i am not political

 

[RestlessSoul]

This is a very obvious logical mistake. They specifically contradict each other. If one theology thinks Jesus is god (Christianity) and the other thinks Jesus was not god (Islam), it is demonstrably evident that they are not both true. Either one is true, or both are false, but its not possible that both are true. You understand that right?

That only really applies if both religions are interpreted in ways which are completely inflexible, which does not have to be the case. And it’s only a problem if practitioners of each are primarily concerned with what separates them, rather than with what unites them.

If practitioners of different faiths are looking for common ground, they’ll always find it, and meet there. If they are looking for conflict, they’ll always find that too; history proves this.

 

[Trailblazer]

Logical? Conflicting statements cannot both be true. Sorry you don’t understand that but I don’t know any other way to respond.

You are correct. The conflicting beliefs held by the believers in the major religions cannot all be true but that does not mean those religions were not once true, in their springtime. The older religions have gone into their fall and winter seasons, so they are no longer what they once were when they were first revealed. Moreover, so much time has passed and they have been so corrupted by man that we do not even know what the original religion looked like anymore.

“All that lives, and this includes the religions, have springtime, a time of maturity, of harvest and wintertime. Then religion becomes barren, a lifeless adherence to the letter uninformed by the spirit, and man’s spiritual life declines. When we look at religious history, we see that God has spoken to men precisely at times when they have reached the nadir of their degradation and cultural decadence. Moses came to Israel when it was languishing under the Pharaoh’s yoke, Christ appeared at a time when the Jewish Faith had lost its power and culture of antiquity was in its death those. Muhammad came to a people who lived in barbaric ignorance at the lowest level of culture and into a world in which the former religions had strayed far away from their origins and nearly lost their identity. The Bab addressed Himself to a people who had irretrievably lost their former grandeur and who found themselves in a state of hopeless decadence. Baha’u’llah came to a humanity which was approaching the most critical phase of its history.” (Udo Schaefer, The Light Shineth in Darkness, p. 24)

 

[Trailblazer]

Jesus preached salvation or damnation and that some people standing while he was alive on earth will not taste death til the second coming that never happened. Jesus preached about bringing a sword of truth.

How is Jesus a Messenger of God. If I thought that each religion had truth, I would see clearly that the truth ieach was delivered in a very faulty, harmful and erroneous way.

The truth was delivered in the only way it could be delivered, to a Messenger of God.

As I just said above, each religion had truth in its spiritual springtime but over the course of time that truth withered away, and that is why religion had to be renewed in every new age.

I could never be a Ba'hai knowing the falsehoods in each major religion.

Baha'is are under no obligation to believe the falsehoods of the older religions in their withered state.

I would expect that true divinity would not mince and mix his message with a bunch of human perspectives, and false manipulations in their stories.

God does not mince and mix His meaasge, men do that after the message is revealed.

It's like Bahullah was refereeing all the religions and telling them to drop their holy wars so that the entire human race can all get along.

That is essentially what Baha'u'llah did, but very few people listened to Him.

 

[Trailblazer]

This is a very obvious logical mistake. They specifically contradict each other. If one theology thinks Jesus is god (Christianity) and the other thinks Jesus was not god (Islam), it is demonstrably evident that they are not both true. Either one is true, or both are false, but its not possible that both are true. You understand that right?

You are right, they cannot both be true, logically speaking. Either one is true, or both are false

The beliefs people hold are what contradict each other, but those beliefs come from man-made dogma which came to be as the result of a misinterpretation and thus a misunderstanding of the meaning of the scriptures of those religions. If all those religious believers knew the true meaning of their scriptures all would agree and have perfect reconciliation.

Part of the mission of Baha'u'llah was to explain what previous scriptures really meant, and if people had listened to Him there would be no more disagreements between the older religions. Baha'u'llah unsealed the Book, as Daniel had prophesied.

Daniel Chapter 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand the true meaning of the Bible. By reading the Baha’i Writings that explain the true meaning of the Bible, we can understand what much of the Bible means that could never be understood before (knowledge shall be increased).

The early Church fathers interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it. For example, they knew Jesus was more than just a man because that was obvious, but they did not understand His twofold nature so they decided that Jesus must be God incarnate.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself." Gleanings, p. 66

Now, because they have rejected Baha'u'llah, Christians continue to interpret the Bible the way it has always been interpreted.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You are right, they cannot both be true, logically speaking. Either one is true, or both are false

The beliefs people hold are what contradict each other, but those beliefs come from man-made dogma which came to be as the result of a misinterpretation and thus a misunderstanding of the meaning of the scriptures of those religions. If all those religious believers knew the true meaning of their scriptures all would agree and have perfect reconciliation.

Part of the mission of Baha'u'llah was to explain what previous scriptures really meant, and if people had listened to Him there would be no more disagreements between the older religions. Baha'u'llah unsealed the Book, as Daniel had prophesied.

Daniel Chapter 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand the true meaning of the Bible. By reading the Baha’i Writings that explain the true meaning of the Bible, we can understand what much of the Bible means that could never be understood before (knowledge shall be increased).

The early Church fathers interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it. For example, they knew Jesus was more than just a man because that was obvious, but they did not understand His twofold nature so they decided that Jesus must be God incarnate.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself." Gleanings, p. 66

Now, because they have rejected Baha'u'llah, Christians continue to interpret the Bible the way it has always been interpreted.

Some people will not see the truth in Baha`i faith but that is how i is. Some do not see truth in any religion or spiritual practice. we do have to respect their view too And honestly i do not think using qoutes from Baha`i teaching will help other than those who can see the truth in it. many will get frustrated when they feel they speaking to a qoute and not to a person

 

[sayak83]

Some people will not see the truth in Baha`i faith but thatis how i is. Some do not see truth in any religion or spiritual practice. we do have to respect their view too And honestly i do not think using qoutes from Baha`i teaching will help other than those who can see the truth in it. many will get frustrated when they feel they speaking to a qoute and not to a person

I get put off mostly with "thy", " thine" and "waiteth"...

 

[sayak83]

You are right, they cannot both be true, logically speaking. Either one is true, or both are false

The beliefs people hold are what contradict each other, but those beliefs come from man-made dogma which came to be as the result of a misinterpretation and thus a misunderstanding of the meaning of the scriptures of those religions. If all those religious believers knew the true meaning of their scriptures all would agree and have perfect reconciliation.

Part of the mission of Baha'u'llah was to explain what previous scriptures really meant, and if people had listened to Him there would be no more disagreements between the older religions. Baha'u'llah unsealed the Book, as Daniel had prophesied.

Daniel Chapter 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The "Book" was intended to be sealed up until the time of the end, until the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days came. The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

We do not have to run to and fro anymore. Unsealing the Book means we can now understand the true meaning of the Bible. By reading the Baha’i Writings that explain the true meaning of the Bible, we can understand what much of the Bible means that could never be understood before (knowledge shall be increased).

The early Church fathers interpreted the Bible the way they did because they could not fully understand it. For example, they knew Jesus was more than just a man because that was obvious, but they did not understand His twofold nature so they decided that Jesus must be God incarnate.

“Unto this subtle, this mysterious and ethereal Being He hath assigned a twofold nature; the physical, pertaining to the world of matter, and the spiritual, which is born of the substance of God Himself." Gleanings, p. 66

Now, because they have rejected Baha'u'llah, Christians continue to interpret the Bible the way it has always been interpreted.

So Bahaullah knows the correct meaning of Jesus and his ministry but those who wrote the gospels 50-120 years after Jesus's death didn't??!!!!
Can you not see how that sounds like?
Sorry did not want a debate here. Just saying

 

[Trailblazer]

So Bahaullah knows the correct meaning of Jesus and his ministry but those who wrote the gospels 50-120 years after Jesus's death didn't??!!!!
Can you not see how that sounds like?
Sorry did not want a debate here. Just saying

I am not saying that those who wrote the Gospels did not know the true nature of Jesus, I am saying that the Christians who later interpreted the Gospels did not know. After all, nowhere in the Gospels did Jesus ever claim to be God, that was decided upon by men at the Council of Nicaea.

I don't care what it sounds like, if Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God, as I believe, then He had the knowledge from God, so He knew more than any man.

 

[sayak83]

I am not saying that those who wrote the Gospels did not know the true nature of Jesus, I am saying that the Christians who later interpreted the Gospels did not know. After all, nowhere in the Gospels did Jesus ever claim to be God, that was decided upon by men at the Council of Nicaea.

I don't care what it sounds like, if Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God, as I believe, then He had the knowledge from God, so He knew more than any man.

According to Bahaullah, did Jesus die and was he resurrected? That is clearly mentioned in the gospels and requires no interpretation.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If you discuss against a religious belief that you do not hold/follow your self, how can you be sure you are correct and the actual believers and followers of the belief in discussion is wrong?

Maybe listening is better than claiming to know

Just to clarify....

When you say "how can you be sure you are correct" - are you referring to being correct about the religious beliefs being inaccurate? Or are you rather talking about being correct about what the religion claims?

Those are off course 2 different things.

I'll answer both.
How can I be sure that I am correct that the beliefs are inaccurate? Easy: evidence (or lack thereof).

How can I be sure about what the religion in question claims? Also rather easy: I read up and / or ask the believers.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Just to clarify....

When you say "how can you be sure you are correct" - are you referring to being correct about the religious beliefs being inaccurate? Or are you rather talking about being correct about what the religion claims?

Those are off course 2 different things.

I'll answer both.
How can I be sure that I am correct that the beliefs are inaccurate? Easy: evidence (or lack thereof).

How can I be sure about what the religion in question claims? Also rather easy: I read up and / or ask the believers.

I was speaking about when someone critique others for their belief, and the critique claim to know the religion better than the one who atually do believe.
So if someone say, your belief say so or so, and i know you have the wrong belief. that become a false claim.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I was speaking about when someone critique others for their belief, and the critique claim to know the religion better than the one who atually do believe.
So if someone say, your belief say so or so, and i know you have the wrong belief. that become a false claim.

Ow, okay. So you are idd asking about how one knows that one is correct about the contents of a religion that someone else follows.

What you describe comes down to what is known as a strawman argument.
I try to avoid that like the plague. As I do with any other logical fallacy.

Does that guarantee me not engaging in such argumentation? No.
But when and if I do, I like people to point it out, so that I may change my argument so that it isn't fallacious.

Having said that....... Beliefs can get rather personal.
I could ask 5 christians a question concerning a specific part of christianity / christian beliefs and receive 5 different answers.

For example... when discussion science with a christian in a conversation related to religion, one of my questions will be if the christian is a creationist / evolution denier.

Because many christians are. And many other christians aren't.

So it's one bible and one genesis chapter. Yet 2 christians can read that and walk away with vastly different beliefs.

There are over 30.000 denominations off christianity, each of them "officially" with specific beliefs. But among a single denomination, you'll find a lot of variation as well.

I know people who call themselves catholic but who don't believe in the virgin birth, for example.

In that sense, I could actually make the case that the number of christian denominations equals the number of christians.

So how to know what somebody believes?
Easy: ask them.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You are correct. The conflicting beliefs held by the believers in the major religions cannot all be true but that does not mean those religions were not once true, in their springtime. The older religions have gone into their fall and winter seasons, so they are no longer what they once were when they were first revealed. Moreover, so much time has passed and they have been so corrupted by man that we do not even know what the original religion looked like anymore.

First thing Hinduism and Buddhism are not revealed religions. And do you mean that Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all corrupted? Even if Quran is true, then the interpretations that Muslims make are corrupted? Kudos, that is is a nice way to foster peace and brotherhood.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The truth was delivered in the only way it could be delivered, to a Messenger of God.
Baha'is are under no obligation to believe the falsehoods of the older religions in their withered state.
That is essentially what Baha'u'llah did, but very few people listened to Him.

That is your view and you are transgressing the rules of the forum by making it seem that it is the only truth. There are people who differ with this view. You are aware that among Hindus and Buddhists, there are no messengers of God or Allah, whatever untruth the Bahais may be trying to establish as truth. Why would Hindus and Buddhists want Bahais to follow their view? If very few people believed what Bahaollah said, then perhaps people thought that his message was not worth consideration. He wrote to many heads of States. What happened? Did they respond? Why blame others of not caring for it?

 

[KerimF]

I would see myself a naive person if I imagine while I have a talk with someone that he may be fooling himself by believing this or that.

I discovered this simple natural fact/truth after meeting many different mature people and none of them thought he could be wrong in what he used to believe as true or real.

This is indeed one of the great beauties in our creation. Every mature human ends up being content/satisfied, if not happy, the way he is created to be unique, despite the big differences among humans (even in one family).

By the way, I envy those who have no idea yet of this natural fact because they can live, once a while, a good time while debating with some others about who is right and who is wrong

May I also add that, in real life, the last word, in every serious situation, is of the side that has the strongest means by which it can silence all other ones

 

[Aupmanyav]

And honestly i do not think using qoutes from Baha`i teaching will help other than those who can see the truth in it.

^^^ See here, Trailblazer. It is useless that you quote an uneducated 19th Century Iranian preacher. It was good for uneducated people like himself in Iranian hinterland, not an science graduate in a metropolitan city in 21st Century. You can quote it a thousand times, even then I would not believe it - because I do not find anything believable in it. I see all this yarn that he spins about Allah and his mission, I am sorry to say, as charlatanry, since he has provided no evidence.

 

[nPeace]

If you discuss against a religious belief that you do not hold/follow your self, how can you be sure you are correct and the actual believers and followers of the belief in discussion is wrong?

Maybe listening is better than claiming to know

I am reminded of the first century A.D.
A man by the name of Jesus, said... "Most truly I say to you, what we know we speak, and what we have seen we bear witness to, but you do not receive the witness we give. " (John 3:11)
Persons objected to that, but jesus said... "I have the witness greater than that of John, for the very works that my Father assigned me to accomplish, these works that I am doing, bear witness that the Father sent me. And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me. (John 5:36, 37)

Now who told him say that.
“You bear witness about yourself; your witness is not true.” Some screamed.
Jesus said to them: “Even if I do bear witness about myself, my witness is true, because I know where I came from and where I am going." (John 8:13, 14)

Jesus never said, I do not know. Why? He knew. he knew the truth. It did not matter what men thought. They did not know.

Some time after Jesus left the earthly scene, a man going by the name of John wrote... "We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one. But we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us insight so that we may gain the knowledge of the one who is true. And we are in union with the one who is true, by means of his Son Jesus Christ. (1 John 5:19, 20)

I write you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie originates with the truth. (1 John 2:21)

We originate with God. Whoever comes to know God listens to us; whoever does not originate with God does not listen to us. By this we distinguish the inspired statement of truth from the inspired statement of error. (1 John 4:6)

John didn't say, they - the apostles did not know? Why? They knew. They too had a clear witness from God.
Of them, Jesus said, "If you remain in my word, you will know the truth." (John 8:31, 32)

Today, Jesus' followers do not say, "I do not know the truth." Why? They know. Like Jesus, and his first century followers, they too have witness that they are commissioned by God. Their works also bear witness to that fact.
Jesus also said... "By this all will know that you are my disciples - if you have love among yourselves." (John 13:35)
So their unity by love, is also bearing witness to the fact that they are Jesus disciples.
All will know.

However, just as they did in Jesus' day - deny the truth. They do today.

A person who does not believe Jesus is God's son ; that he is in heaven, looking over, and guiding his followers, as he did in the first century, may not see that as a reality.
So it is understandable whan they don't look at things from that perspective.

For a person who does not know these things, I totally agree, they should listen.
Not only listen, but allow themselves to be taught.
Having a humble heart will contribute to this.
Also faith... which many will not have. . . .for faith is not a possession of all people. (2 Thessalonians 3:2)

Of course, it's possible to think one is right, and yet be wrong, but those who are not mistaken, are not mistaken. They know.

 

[MikeF]

There is worse case scenarios with any type of government.

There is a difference however. A government established by either mutual agreement among people, or imposed by some people on all, are all derived and justified by people themselves. Any laws and regulations can be questioned, re-evaluated, and refined by people as the needs and values of the political body change.

On the other hand, the laws and regulations in a Theocratic government are not created and set down by people themselves, but rather, are set by the God endorsed by the state. These laws and regulations cannot be questioned, re-evaluated, or refined, for to do so would be to question God, or the God of the state. This inability to question or revise leads to stagnation of the body politic, an inability to evolve and improve over time.

Can you appreciate this difference between laws created by people and those created by a specific religion's God?